2021 (2) TMI 1289 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Review Jurisdiction - error apparent on the face of the order or not - HELD THAT - While holding that no grounds are made out for reviewing the impugned order, this Court directs the petitioners to take earnest steps to resolve the mismatch issue and as far as possible, avoid the dealers being called upon to produce documents by verifying details available in the departmental website and only when it is not possible for the Department to reconcile, then the dealers may be put on notice and in such circumstances, a more conciliatory approach shall be taken if the dealers are called upon to appear. The review application is dismissed.

Summary

Issues: Review of order and directions in W.P. No.105 of 2016

In this judgment, the petitioners sought a review of the order and directions issued in W.P. No.105 of 2016. The court observed that the petitioners failed to point out any error apparent on the face of the order justifying a review. The State was concerned about implementing the order and directions issued in the previous order. The court noted that the Commercial Taxes Department had introduced a scheme for verification using technology to resolve disputes without requiring dealers to appear before officers unless necessary. The court directed the petitioners to take steps to resolve mismatches and avoid unnecessary document production by utilizing departmental website details. It emphasized a conciliatory approach when dealers are called upon to appear only when reconciliation by the Department is not possible. The court dismissed the review application and the connected Writ Miscellaneous Petition.

This judgment primarily dealt with the review application filed by the petitioners regarding the order and directions issued in a previous case. The court emphasized the need for the State to focus on implementing the directions effectively, especially in resolving disputes related to commercial taxes. The court acknowledged the efforts made by the Commercial Taxes Department to streamline the verification process using technology, which could lead to the resolution of a significant number of cases. The court directed the petitioners to proactively address mismatch issues and minimize the burden on dealers by utilizing departmental resources for verification before resorting to dealer involvement. The court's directive aimed to promote efficiency and reduce unnecessary procedural hurdles in resolving tax-related disputes.

Overall, the judgment highlighted the importance of utilizing technology and departmental resources effectively to streamline processes and resolve disputes in a timely manner. By emphasizing a conciliatory approach and encouraging proactive steps to address mismatches, the court aimed to facilitate smoother resolution of tax-related issues while minimizing the burden on dealers. The dismissal of the review application signaled the court's satisfaction with the measures proposed by the Commercial Taxes Department and the expectation for the petitioners to cooperate in implementing these measures effectively.