9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (6) TMI 275 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxStay on operation of the assessment order - deposit of pre-requisite money as required U/S 70(2) of the TVAT Act 2004 - HELD THAT - This court finds sufficient force in the submission made by Mr. Bhowmik learned Advocate General. But as from the record it has surfaced that the said amount has been shown on account as the excess payment the revisional authority (the Commissioner of Taxes Government of Tripura) is directed to consider the said excess amount and adjust the same against the pre-requisite payment in terms of Section 70(2) of the TVAT Act if the said amount is really the excess amount. Since the revisional authority has fixed date on 07.07.2020 for consideration of admission till that day no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner on the basis of the assessment order of the dated 17.01.2020 for the assessment years of 2016-17 and 2017-18. In addition thereto the direction of the Commissioner of Taxes to the respondent No.5 to deduct the amount i.e. the assessed tax and penalty from his bill as reflected in the communication dated 15.05.2020 (annexure-2 to the writ petition) shall remain suspended till the decision in the revision petition. Petition disposed off.
Issues:
Petition to quash notice of demand and prohibit further action based on it. Interpretation of Section 70(2) of the Tripura Value Added Tax Act, 2004 regarding pre-requisite money deposit for revision petition. Analysis: The petitioner, a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, sought to quash a notice of demand dated 15.05.2020 and prevent the respondents from acting on it. The petitioner filed a revision petition under Section 70 of the Tripura Value Added Tax Act, 2004 against an assessment order for the years 2016-17 and 2017-18. The petitioner also filed a separate petition to stay the operation of the assessment order during the pendency of the revisional petition. The Revisional Authority had not passed any order or fixed a hearing date, prompting the petitioner to seek interim protection from the assessment order. The Advocate General presented an order from the revisional authority recognizing the revision petition but noting the non-deposit of necessary money as required under Section 70(2) of the TVAT Act. The revisional authority allowed the petitioner an opportunity to make the required deposit and set a date for further consideration. The petitioner claimed to have already paid an excess amount, which was not considered by the revisional authority in its initial order. The court directed the revisional authority to assess the claimed excess amount and adjust it against the pre-requisite payment as per Section 70(2) of the TVAT Act. Until the date set for further consideration, no coercive action was to be taken against the petitioner based on the assessment order. Additionally, a direction to deduct the assessed tax and penalty from the petitioner's bill was suspended pending the revision petition's decision. The court disposed of the writ petition, allowing the petitioner to seek further legal recourse if aggrieved by the revisional authority's order. The petitioner was granted permission to file an application detailing the excess amount paid for adjustment against the requisite payment under Section 70(2) of the TVAT Act. A copy of the order from the revisional authority was taken into record, and copies of the court's order were to be supplied to the parties' counsel.
|
