2017 (10) TMI 1277 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Whether in the facts, evidences, circumstances and details available on record, the Tribunal was justified in rejecting the plea of grant of prospective effect u/s 56(2) of the MVAT Act? Held that - In view of these specific assertions, we request the learned President of the Tribunal to submit a report dealing with what is stated in paragraph 5. The report shall be submitted in a sealed envelope which shall not be opened without prior permission of this Court - appeal to be listed for directions.

Summary

Issues:
1. Whether the Tribunal was justified in rejecting the plea of grant of prospective effect u/s 56(2) of the MVAT Act?

Analysis:
The High Court admitted the appeal based on the substantial question of law regarding the rejection of the plea of grant of prospective effect under section 56(2) of the MVAT Act. The Court directed attention to the Memorandum of Appeal, specifically referring to paragraph 5, which detailed the proceedings before the Tribunal. The paragraph highlighted that the matter was heard by a larger Bench but was closed for order without any judgment being passed. The President of the Tribunal later stated that the appeal could only be decided by a third judge due to disagreements between two Bench members. The appellant requested a fresh hearing, which was denied, and the order was passed by a Single Member as a third member.

In response to these assertions, the Court requested the President of the Tribunal to submit a report addressing the issues raised in paragraph 5. The report was to be sealed and submitted to the Court for further consideration. The Court scheduled the appeal to be listed under 'Directions' on a specified date to review the report. The respondent's Advocate on record waived service, and the Court directed the Registrar (Judicial) to forward the order to the President of the Tribunal for necessary action.