2024 (5) TMI 122 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Condonation of delay in filing petition - Belated writ petition - by oversight Vakalat was not filed - appellate Tribunal by two separate cryptic orders has allowed the appeals filed by the Commercial Tax Department - HELD THAT - Although there is a delay in approaching this Court, the substantive right of an assessee cannot be denied, particularly in a peremptory manner by passing a cryptic order. The dismissal of the application for restoring the appeal and allowing the appeal of the Commercial Tax Department without any reasonings especially when the order of the Appellate Commissioner is detailed has to be construed as an arbitrary order and therefore, it is liable to be set aside. It could have been different, if the order is passed on merits. The impugned orders can be set aside and the appeals be restored back to the file of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal for disposal of all the four appeals together on merits and in accordance with law. The petitioner is directed to file Vakalat and file the notes and submissions, if any, as per the procedure followed by the Appellate Tribunal. Petition allowed.

Summary

Issues involved:
The judgment involves issues related to belated writ petitions, adverse assessment orders under the TNVAT Act, 2006, dismissal of application for restoring appeal, and arbitrary orders passed by the Appellate Tribunal.

Belated Writ Petitions:
The writ petitions were disposed of at the time of admission with the consent of the Additional Government Pleader for the respondents, despite being considered belated. The decision was influenced by a recent Supreme Court case, Mrinmoy Maity Vs. Chhanda Koley, and another Supreme Court case, Bogidhola Tea and Trading Company Vs. Hira Lal Somani.

Adverse Assessment Orders under the TNVAT Act, 2006:
The petitioner, an assessee under the TNVAT Act, 2006, faced adverse assessment orders from the third respondent for two assessment years. However, the petitioner succeeded in the appeal before the First Appellate Authority.

Dismissal of Application for Restoring Appeal:
The petitioner's appeals for the assessment years 2008-09 and 2009-10 were allowed by the Appellate Tribunal due to an oversight in filing Vakalat. An application to set aside the ex parte order was rejected because the affidavit was filed by the Clerk attached to the Advocate of the petitioner. The High Court found the dismissal of the application and the allowance of the Commercial Tax Department's appeal without reasoning to be arbitrary and set them aside.

Arbitrary Orders by the Appellate Tribunal:
The High Court considered the arguments of both parties and concluded that the dismissal of the application and the allowance of the appeal without reasoning were arbitrary. The Court emphasized that the substantive right of an assessee cannot be denied in a peremptory manner and ordered the appeals to be restored back to the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal for disposal on merits and in accordance with the law.