2013 (12) TMI 1333 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Rectification of mistake - Tribunal held that the petitioner is not a dealer under the Gujarat Sales Tax Act - Wrong mention of Gujarat Sales Tax Act instead of Gujarat Value Added Tax - Tribunal rejected rectification application - Held that - there is an obvious mistake committed by the tribunal in considering the case of the appellant under the Gujarat Sales Tax Act - tribunal ought to have rectified the mistake and as such ought to have reviewed and recalled the order passed in Appeal No. 11/2006 and ought to have restored Appeal No. 11/2006 on file and ought to have decided the same afresh in accordance with law and on its own merits - matter is remanded to the tribunal to decide Appeal No. 11/2006 afresh in accordance with law - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Rectification of order passed by the Gujarat Value Added Tax Tribunal.
2. Interpretation of the definition of 'dealer' under the Gujarat Sales Tax Act.
3. Consideration of whether the petitioner is a dealer under the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003.

Detailed Analysis:
Issue 1: The petitioner sought to quash and set aside the impugned order passed by the Gujarat Value Added Tax Tribunal, which rejected the rectification application submitted by the petitioner to rectify the order passed earlier. The tribunal had initially held that the petitioner is not a dealer under the Gujarat Sales Tax Act but did not consider whether the petitioner could be considered a dealer under the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003. The High Court found an obvious mistake in the tribunal's consideration and directed a review and recall of the order to decide the matter afresh in accordance with the law.

Issue 2: While deciding the appeals, the tribunal had initially held that the appellant cannot be considered a dealer under the Gujarat Sales Tax Act. However, the tribunal failed to consider whether the petitioner, running a medical store, could be classified as a dealer under the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003. The High Court noted the mistake made by the tribunal in applying the incorrect tax legislation and directed a fresh consideration under the correct law.

Issue 3: The High Court observed that the tribunal had erred in not considering whether the petitioner, operating a medical store, could be classified as a dealer under the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003. The court directed the tribunal to review and recall its previous order, and to decide whether the petitioner meets the criteria to be classified as a dealer under the relevant tax legislation. The court emphasized that this reconsideration should be completed within six months from the date of the court's order.

In conclusion, the High Court allowed the Special Civil Application, quashed the impugned orders, and remanded the matter to the tribunal for fresh consideration to determine whether the petitioner qualifies as a dealer under the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003. The court emphasized the importance of applying the correct tax legislation and directed the tribunal to complete the review within a specified timeframe.