2020 (9) TMI 218 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Validity of Bihar Value Added Tax Ordinance, 2005 - vested rights accrued to the Petitioners with retrospective effect before expiry of the period for exemption from payment of Sales-tax on sale of Finished Products under the Notification- S 0 No. 96 dt. 04.04.1994 and Notification-S 0 No. 479 dt.22.12.1995 issued under the Industrial Policy, 1993 1995. HELD THAT - This issue can be agitated by the petitioner first with the appropriate authority and thereafter before the appropriate forum in accordance with law. Petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
1. Declaration regarding Bihar Value Added Tax Ordinance, 2005 provisions nullifying vested rights for exemption from sales tax on finished products.
2. Declaration on denial of benefits to industrial units under the Bihar Value Added Tax Ordinance, 2005.
3. Challenge to Section 96(3)(b) of the Bihar Value Added Tax Ordinance, 2005 denying exemption from sales tax.
4. Challenge to Section 94 of the Bihar Value Added Tax Ordinance, 2005 repealing rights acquired under previous laws.
5. Request to read down provisions of Bihar Value Added Tax Ordinance, 2005 for exemption benefits.
6. Exemption from tax on products until reaching customers and absence of tax on subsequent sale value addition.
7. Reference to a previous court case for exemption from tax on goods manufactured by an exempted unit.
8. Restraining sales tax authorities from demanding tax on products sold by petitioners.
9. Challenge to the alternative deferment option for tax payment under Section 96(3)(b) of the Bihar Value Added Tax Ordinance, 2005.

Analysis:

1. The petitioners sought declarations regarding the Bihar Value Added Tax Ordinance, 2005 provisions nullifying vested rights for exemption from sales tax on finished products. The court acknowledged the change in law over time and the petition becoming infructuous. The court allowed the petitioners to address their discrimination grievances with the appropriate authorities and forums in accordance with the law, granting liberty for such actions.

2. The challenge was raised against the denial of benefits to industrial units under the Bihar Value Added Tax Ordinance, 2005. The court recognized the discrimination claimed by the petitioners and permitted them to pursue their grievances through the appropriate legal channels. The court emphasized the need for the authorities to consider and decide on such matters promptly and within a specified timeframe.

3. Section 96(3)(b) of the Bihar Value Added Tax Ordinance, 2005 was challenged for denying exemption from sales tax. The court did not provide a specific ruling on this issue but directed the petitioners to address their concerns through the proper legal procedures, ensuring a fair consideration of their claims by the authorities.

4. The petitioners contested Section 94 of the Bihar Value Added Tax Ordinance, 2005, which repealed rights acquired under previous laws. While the court did not provide a detailed judgment on this specific challenge, it allowed the petitioners to pursue their grievances through established legal avenues, emphasizing the need for a timely resolution of such matters.

5. The request to read down provisions of the Bihar Value Added Tax Ordinance, 2005 for exemption benefits was not explicitly addressed in the judgment. The court granted the petitioners the liberty to pursue their claims through appropriate legal channels, ensuring a fair and expeditious consideration of their grievances by the authorities.

6. The court did not provide a specific ruling on the exemption from tax on products until reaching customers and the absence of tax on subsequent sale value addition. The petition was disposed of with the liberty granted to the petitioners to address their discrimination concerns through the proper legal procedures.

7. The reference to a previous court case for exemption from tax on goods manufactured by an exempted unit was made in the petition. However, the judgment did not elaborate on this reference, focusing instead on allowing the petitioners to pursue their grievances through established legal avenues.

8. The petitioners sought restraint on sales tax authorities from demanding tax on products sold by them. The court did not provide a specific ruling on this issue but allowed the petitioners to address their concerns through the appropriate legal channels, emphasizing the need for a prompt resolution of such matters.

9. The challenge to the alternative deferment option for tax payment under Section 96(3)(b) of the Bihar Value Added Tax Ordinance, 2005 was raised. The court did not provide a detailed ruling on this challenge but directed the petitioners to pursue their grievances through the established legal procedures, ensuring a fair consideration of their claims by the authorities.