2021 (8) TMI 880 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Maintainability of petition - compliance with the requirement of pre-deposit or not - HELD THAT - Petitioner states that the Petitioner will be prepared to make the pre-deposit of ₹ 14,10,760/- within a period of four weeks with the Opposite Party-Department without prejudice to its rights and contentions and the appeal may be revived before the ACST (Appeals) subject to compliance of the directions given. Petition disposed off with various directions issued.

Summary

Issues:
1. Assessment order under Odisha Value Added Tax, 2004 (OVAT Act) for the period 2013-2015.
2. Appeal filed by Petitioner with waiver application for pre-deposit.
3. Dismissal of appeal by ACST (Appeals) due to failure of pre-deposit.
4. Petitioner's contention of nonest assessment order due to proceedings under Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC).
5. Directions issued by the High Court for revival of the appeal.

Analysis:
1. The judgment involves a challenge to an assessment order passed under the Odisha Value Added Tax Act for the period from 1st April, 2013 to 31st March, 2015. The Petitioner had previously filed a writ petition which was disposed of with directions to file an appeal before the Additional Commissioner of Sales Tax of CT & GST (Appeals) (ACST).

2. The Petitioner filed an appeal along with an application for waiver of pre-deposit under Section 77(4) of the OVAT Act. However, the ACST (Appeals) required a pre-deposit of &8377; 14,10,760, which was not made by the Petitioner leading to a notice for dismissal of the appeal.

3. The Petitioner contended that the assessment order was invalid due to proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code before the National Company Law Tribunal, Kolkata. Despite this argument, the ACST (Appeals) dismissed the appeal for failure to make the mandatory pre-deposit.

4. The High Court issued directions for the revival of the appeal, subject to the Petitioner making the pre-deposit within a specified time frame. The appeal was to be listed for directions and a fresh order was to be passed on merits within four months. If the Petitioner succeeds, the deposited sum would be refunded with interest, and no coercive action would be taken during the pendency of the appeal.

5. Both parties were directed to cooperate for timely disposal of the appeal without unnecessary adjournments. The writ petition was disposed of in accordance with the directions issued by the High Court, emphasizing compliance with the conditions set forth in the judgment.