2021 (12) TMI 150 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Application for revision filed under Section 9 (2) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 read with Section 87A of the Value Added Tax Act, 2003 - Denial of claim of export sales made by the appellants - appellants have not produced records before the revisional authority - HELD THAT - The revisional authority records that the partner of the appellants could not produce any document relating to the case and therefore, rejected the prayer for adjournment and dismissed the revision petition on the ground that in the absence of books of accounts and other relevant documents, there is no scope for examination of the grievances of the appellants. In our considered view, the approach of the revisional authority should be with a view to ensure that the taxes which are legally leviable and collectable are collected at the appropriate time. Therefore, the authorities should seldom reject the prayer of the dealers on technicalities or hyper-technicalities. It may be true that the partner of the appellants was not in a position to adequately represent the matter but however, if a short accommodation had been granted, the entire exercise of the matter travelling up to this Division Bench could have been well avoided. Therefore, without expressing anything on the merits of the matter, it is held that one more opportunity may be granted to the appellants to establish that the transactions were in fact genuine exports for which the appellants will be entitled to produce necessary documents, most of which, according to the appellants, are already on record. The order and direction issued by the Learned Single Bench is modified by directing the appellants/petitioners to appear before the revisional authority on a date which may be intimated to the appellants - Appeal allowed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Condonation of delay in filing the appeal.
2. Challenge to the order passed by the Fast Track Revisional Authority.
3. Dismissal of the writ petition and declining interference with the order.
4. Granting one more opportunity to the appellants to establish the genuineness of export transactions.

Condonation of Delay:
The High Court was informed that the originals of the applications were not traceable, and photocopies were filed, treated as originals. The delay of 94 days in filing the appeal was sought to be condoned. After hearing both parties, the Court found the reasons in the affidavit supporting the application satisfactory and thus condoned the delay.

Challenge to Revisional Authority's Order:
The appeal was by a dealer registered under tax laws, challenging an order denying the claim of export sales. The revisional authority dismissed the revision as the appellants failed to produce records. The Single Bench declined interference citing failure to avail the opportunity granted by the authority. The High Court heard arguments from both sides and observed that if a party fails to avail an opportunity granted by a statutory authority, further indulgence cannot be granted. The Court noted that the revisional authority rejected the prayer for adjournment due to the absence of relevant documents. Emphasizing the need to ensure timely tax collection, the Court opined that technicalities should not lead to rejection of prayers. The High Court allowed the appeal, granting the appellants another opportunity to establish the genuineness of transactions.

Granting Opportunity to Establish Genuineness:
The High Court directed the appellants to appear before the revisional authority within 30 days, without seeking adjournment, to present all necessary documents. The revisional authority was instructed to decide on merits and in accordance with the law, uninfluenced by previous observations. The Court emphasized the importance of granting opportunities to dealers and avoiding unnecessary escalations to higher judicial levels. The appeal was allowed, modifying the order issued by the Single Bench.

Conclusion:
The High Court allowed the appeal, granting the appellants another chance to establish the genuineness of their export transactions. The Court emphasized the importance of providing opportunities to present necessary documents and ensuring decisions are made based on merits and legal provisions, without being influenced by past orders.