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

1998 (3) TMI 659

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... . Applicant No. 2 is a Director and shareholder of the company. The company is a registered dealer under the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941 (in short, the 1941 Act ). The applicants moved a writ petition under article 226 of the Constitution of India before the High Court at Calcutta challenging the legality and validity of the imposition of turnover tax. By an order dated April 27, 1981, the High Court was pleased to dispose of the said writ petition. Against the said order dated April 27, 1981 the applicants filed an appeal and an application for stay before the High Court at Calcutta. The Appeal Court was pleased to dispose of the said application for stay by directing the applicants to deposit with the Registrar, Appellate Side .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ppeal against the said order of assessment charging interest under section 10A before the respondent No. 2. The applicant contended in the course of hearing of the appeal that no interest should be charged since the applicant is regularly filing the returns of turnover tax and paying the tax as per the order of the High Court and none of the provisions of section 10A is applicable in the facts and circumstances of the case. By an order dated February 13, 1995, the respondent No. 2 rejected all the contentions of the applicant and confirmed the order of respondent No. 1 with regard to the charging of interest relying on the judgment of this Tribunal in the case of Kingsway and Co. [1990] 76 STC 119. The applicant has approached this Tribun .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the case of the applicant stands transferred to the Tribunal on February 27, 1989 and the interim order, if any, granted by the Calcutta High Court stands vacated on expiry of 12 weeks from February 27, 1989, if the same is not extended or varied by the Tribunal. Since the interim order obtained by the applicant has not been extended by the Tribunal, it cannot be said that the interim order dated April 30, 1981 passed by the trial Bench of the Calcutta High Court is still continuing. Respondents have further submitted that the High Court, by order dated April 30, 1981, did only restrain the respondents from realising turnover tax during the continuance of the said interim order. It is a settled principle of law that the return furnished by .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ppellants filed writ petitions in the High Court challenging the validity of section 6B of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941. On admission of the writ petitions, the High Court granted interim injunction against the Government from collecting such tax, but ultimately the writ petitions were dismissed and the appellants paid the tax thereafter. Demands were made on the appellants under section 10A for interest on the amount of tax for the period during the period of default. The appellants challenged the demand for interest before the West Bengal Taxation Tribunal, but the Tribunal upheld the demand. On appeal to the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Tribunal and held: (i) that the return of turnover to .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ed by the High Court on a variety of considerations, one among them being the strained financial position of the person approaching it. Merely because the High Court had granted interim orders it could not be inferred that the court was satisfied of a strong prima facie case for the appellants. On the contrary, it was well-settled that there was always a presumption in favour of the constitutionality of a legislative act; the presumption could not be the other way round. 8.. In view of this judgment of the Supreme Court, we need not go into the arguments presented by the learned advocates on behalf of the applicant as well as the respondents and we must hold that the orders charging interest under section 10A passed by the respondents Nos .....

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