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

2014 (3) TMI 780

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 1st respondent have released the amount to the petitioner, it will not mean that the 2nd respondent cannot retain the present impugned Demand Draft since already the writ petition filed by the petitioner for the same relief for the same turnover, it has been dismissed for the same reason - similar writ petition has been filed in W.P.No.579 of 2004 for the same relief and the same was dismissed by this Court by order dated 21.1.2004 –The Assessee also closed down his business - Since the petitioner has not filed any writ appeal as against the said order, it has become final - Thus, second writ Petition for the same relief is not maintainable in law - Writ Petition dismissed – Decided against assessee. - Writ Petition No. 6978 of 2008 and M .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... .5 metric tonnes of Sandalwood and also furnished bank guarantee for Rs.12,08,892/- for 14.5. metric tonnes of Sandalwood. After taking delivery, the petitioner has submitted the Form C in respect of 14.5 metric tonnes of Sandalwood for establishing his case with the 1st respondent. The 1st respondent thereafter passed an order dated 19.11.2002 extending the Bank Guarantee up to 26.3.2003. 4. Further, as per the Common order dated 19.8.2002, the 2nd respondent had to release the bank guarantee in No.31/18 for Rs.12,08,892/- on scrutiny of documents. But, by mistake the same was released by the 1st respondent. To rectify the same, the petitioner has also filed a Modification Petition in W.P.M.P.No.23586 of 2005 in W.P.35965/2002 enabling t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... erseas Sale, the amount comes Rs.19,73,598/- for 18.5 metric tonnes of Sandalwood. The learned Senior Counsel would also submit that aggrieved over the order passed by this Court in W.P.M.P.Nos.53861 to 53866 of 2002 in W.P.35965/2002 to 35966 of 2002, dated 18.9.2002 filed by the petitioner, the petitioner, instead of depositing 4 = % tax before the 2nd respondent, deposited before the 1st respondent and after filing proper M.P. by order dated 13.4.2006 of this Court, the same was also ratified. Therefore, the bank guarantee has to be released by the 1st respondent. Hence, the learned Senior Counsel would pray to allow the present Writ Petition. 7. Learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the 1st respondent would contend that the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... by the 1st respondent on 25.7.2002 which was also confirmed by the 1st respondent and as per the direction, he has to pay 12% Sales Tax, as per the direction issued by this Court, the petitioner has got exemption to pay the sales tax to some extent are not in dispute. Accordingly, the petitioner has to pay only 4% of Sales Tax and for the remaining 8%, the petitioner has issued the bank guarantee in B.G.31/17 for Rs.19,73,598/- for 18.5 Metric Tonnes of Sandalwood are also not in dispute. But, it appears that the petitioner has issued the same to the 1st respondent instead of issuing the same to the 2nd respondent and the same was later on modified by the orders of this Court in W.P.M.P.No.23586/2005 in W.P.35965/2002 dated 13.4.2006. 11. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... contention of the first respondent is for the same relief, already writ petition has been filed by the petitioner and the same was dismissed. Since the petitioner has not filed any writ appeal as against the said order, it has become final. In these circumstances, the petitioner is not entitled to file another Writ Petition for the same relief. Hence, he prays that the writ Petition has to be dismissed. 16. From the perusal of the impugned order, it is seen that the case of the first respondent is that the sandal wood has been sold within the State. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled for the exemption from the Sales Tax pursuant to the exemption certificate issued by the Commercial Tax Officer on the earlier occasion for Overseas .....

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