2024 (3) TMI 587 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Levy of VAT on royalty on which Service Tax has already been paid - It is the respondent s contention that the assessment orders dated 29 March, 2019 and 31 March, 2020 could not have been passed by the Assessing officer at Mazgaon jurisdiction and in fact such orders ought to have been passed by the Assessing Officer at the Kalyan jurisdiction - HELD THAT - Insofar as the period which was spent by the petitioner in pursuing the present proceedings are concerned, which is the period from 11 November, 2022 till the passing of this order, the petitioners would be entitled to avail of the benefit under the provisions of Section 14 of the Limitation Act - Insofar as the period of limitation for filing the statutory appeal is concerned, all contentions of the respondents in regard to any issue of limitation and more particularly on the question that the assessment orders dated 2 March, 2017 and 7 June, 2017 were not served in September, 2022 but earlier thereto, we keep open the contentions of the parties. Needless to observe that for the period 2010-11, 2011-12 in respect of which assessment orders dated 29 March, 2019 and 31 March, 2020 are sought to be withdrawn, the petitioners would be entitled to file statutory appeal as permissible in law within a period of six weeks from today. If so filed, let the appeals be decided without an objection as to limitation and on merits. Petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues involved:
The issues involved in the judgment include the levy of VAT on royalty payments, jurisdiction of Assessing Officers, assessment orders for various years, service of orders, and the right to appeal.

Levy of VAT on Royalty Payments:
The petitioners sought a declaration that the levy of VAT on royalty payments, on which Service Tax has already been paid, is without authority of law and in excess of jurisdiction. They also contended that multiple divisions cannot simultaneously seek to pass orders to levy VAT. The High Court permitted the petitioners to challenge the assessment orders through the remedy of an appeal as provided under the law.

Jurisdiction of Assessing Officers:
The judgment highlighted the jurisdictional issues regarding assessment orders passed by officers from Kalyan and Mazgaon divisions for different assessment years. The court noted discrepancies in the service of orders and allowed the petitioners to file statutory appeals within specified timelines.

Assessment Orders for Various Years:
The court examined assessment orders for the years 2008-09 to 2013-14 passed by Assessing Officers from different jurisdictions. It was observed that some orders were served late, leading to disputes over jurisdiction and service. The respondents agreed to withdraw certain orders, enabling the petitioners to seek refunds and withdraw pending appeals.

Service of Orders and Right to Appeal:
Disputes arose over the service of assessment orders, with the petitioners claiming late receipt of orders through email. The judgment allowed the petitioners to challenge the assessment orders through appeals, ensuring their right to present all contentions in the appeal proceedings. The court also granted the petitioners the benefit of the Limitation Act for the period spent pursuing the case.

Separate Judgment by Judges:
No separate judgment was delivered by the judges in this case.