Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2013 (7) TMI 430

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... r [1998 (11) TMI 526 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA], Commissioner of Sales Tax, UP Lucknow Vs M/s Super Cotton Bowl Refilling Works [1989 (2) TMI 115 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] and Manmohan Singh Jaitla vs Commissioner Union Territory of Chandigarh and Others [1984 (12) TMI 269 - SUPREME COURT] - Decided against Assessee. - Writ Appeal No . 214 of 2013 - - - Dated:- 18-6-2013 - Shri Yatindra Singh, C.J. And Shri Pritinker Diwaker, JJ. For the Appellants : Shri Neelabh Dubey, counsel. For the Respondent : Shri Kishore Bhaduri, Additional Advocate General for the State. JUDGMENT 1. The main question involved in this case is, 'Whether the power exercised by the Commissioner under section 70 of the Chhattisgarh Value Added Tax Act 2005 (the Act) is quasi-judicial or administrative in nature.' It arises in this writ appeal against order of the single judge dated 21.02.2013 passed in WP(T)-102 of 2012 dismissing the writ petition of M/s Sony India Private Limited (the Appellant) for quashing the order dated 21.02.2013 passed by the Commissioner under section 70 of the Act. THE FACTS 2. The Appellant is engaged in the business of selling a range of consumer audio, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ct is binding upon all the authorities mentioned in section 3 of the Act except when they are deciding the appeals; The order of the Commissioner is binding upon the Assessing Officers, but not in appeal or further proceeding against those orders; It is always open to the appellate or higher authority to take a different view, if the law so requires in proceeding against assessment orders; The Appellant can very well take the previously mentioned objections in the proceeding against the assessment order; The Appellant has efficacious remedy available to it. It should not be permitted to short-circuit the assessment proceeding; and It is not a fit case to exercise writ jurisdiction under article 226 of the Constitution. 11. The submissions raised by the counsel for the parties are weighty and have substance. We would have considered them on merits, but are not doing so, as the writ appeal is not maintainable. THE DECISION 12. Before we give our reasons for non-maintainability of the writ appeal, it is necessary to consider whether the Commissioner is performing quasi-judicial or administrative functions while deciding the question about rate of tax. Is his .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... , the question was not whether any order was administrative or quasi judicial in nature but whether section 59A of the Kerala Act was ultra vires the Constitution or not. It is in this reference that the Supreme Court made a passing remarks that the order is an administrative order. 21. Apart from above, there is nothing to show that under the Kerala Act, the procedure was similar to the one as contemplated under rule 79 of the Rules. There is nothing to show that the order was to be passed after affording opportunity. It is because of the detailed procedure mentioned in rule 79 of the Rules that we have held that order to be quasi judicial in nature. In absence of such provision or procedure, the observations in the Travancore-Chemicals case cannot be made applicable here. 22. In Commissioner of Sales Tax, UP Lucknow Vs M/s Super Cotton Bowl Refilling Works {(1989) 1 SCC 643} (the Super-Cotton case), interpretation of section 35 as contained in the UP Sales Tax Act, 1948 (the UP Act) was involved. It is similar to provision here except that the procedure was provided in the section itself. 23. In the Super-cotton case, the Supreme Court observed that the order passed by the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s; The High Court dismissed the writ petitions on the ground that they were not other authorities under article 12 of the Constitution though it was admitted that the Deputy Commissioner and the Commissioner were exercising quasi judicial functions. 29. The Supreme Court allowed the appeals in the Jaitla case and observed : 'The High Court clearly overlooked the point that Deputy Commissioner and Commissioner are statutory authorities operating under the 1969 Act. They are quasi-judicial authorities and that was not disputed. Therefore, they will be comprehended in the expression 'Tribunal' as used in Article 227 of the Constitution which confers power of superintendence over all courts and tribunals by the High Court throughout the territory in relation to which it exercises jurisdiction. Obviously, therefore, the decision of the statutory quasi-judicial authorities which can be appropriately described as tribunal will be subject to judicial review namely a writ of certiorari by the High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution.' 30. In the present case, The writ petition was filed for quashing/ setting aside the order passed by a Tribunal. It was essentially under su .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ot reduce the rate of tax in review. (3) Any order passed by the Commissioner under sub-section(1) and (2) shall have a prospective effect and shall be binding on the authorities referred to in Section 3 in all proceedings under this Act except appeals. Appendix-2 Rule 79 of the Chhattisgarh Value Added Tax Rules, 2006 is as follows: 79. Procedure for determination under section 70 of disputed questions (1) (a) Every dealer desirous of raising a question for determination of the rate of tax on any goods shall make an application to the Commissioner. (b) Every dealer making such application shall deposit a fee of rupees one hundred and enclose with the application a copy of chalan in form 34 in proof the payment of such fee. (2) Every application made under clause(a) of sub-rule(1) shall, (i) be in duplicate; (ii) clearly state the facts relating to the goods in respect of which determination is sought, that is to say, their description, the use to which the goods are put to, specification thereof, raw material used in the manufacture of such goods and give a detailed description of the process of manufacture of the goods in question; (iii) be accompanied by a sa .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates