9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (7) TMI 370X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tive Societies Act, 2002, and is engaged in the manufacturing of Urea, which is a fertilizer, liable to value added tax @ 4% and additional tax @ 1% under Entry No.19 of Schedule II of Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003. The appellants are also a registered dealer of the aforesaid products under Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969. Alongwith local sales, the appellants are also making interstate sales and are having registered branch offices across the country. The appellants availed the input tax credit on its purchase of inputs, packing material etc as may be eligible to them. The assessment for the year 1989-90 was completed by Sales Tax Officer, DivisionII, Surat, on 30.07.1994, whereby, demand was raised to the extent of Rs. 1,21,38,134/- . In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tax without appreciating the submissions made by the appellants passed an order on 30.06.2004, whereby, the assessment order dated 30.07.1994 came to be upheld and simultaneously even the plea of limitation raised by the appellant came to be rejected. Since this was the position on record, on 26.07.2004 and 05.08.2004, the appellants filed an application for rectification of mistake contained in an order dated 30.06.2004 stating the above facts. It appears that this application for rectification remained pending for long and finally on 09.04.2013 was rejected by the Commissioner. Aggrieved by the said order dated 09.04.2013, whereby, the application for rectification of mistake came to be rejected, the appellants filed an appeal before the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ars. In the background of this fact, when later on the department filed a Misc. Application before the Tribunal to place on record the fact that an application for rectification of mistake was indeed filed by the appellants, it has now been established that rectification application was very much filed and under this bonafide state of circumstance, during the pendency of said rectification application, the appellant could not prefer an appeal. This circumstance is required to be taken note of while examining the order of Tribunal which is impugned in the present Tax Appeal. The learned counsel on behalf of the appellant stated that this was the bonafide circumstance and there was no illmotive on the part of the appellants not to prefer an a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al reason upon which, the order is passed by the Tribunal no longer survives and therefore, the delay which has occasioned is required to be condoned in the interest of justice and the appellants are required to be given a fair chance to prosecute the appeal on merits. While considering this appeal, it has come to the notice of this Court that the main amount which has been assessed i.e. Rs. 1,21,38,534/- is long back deposited by Challan dated 03.10.1994 and therefore, if the appeal is ordered to be heard on merits, no serious prejudice is likely to be caused to the department and it is settled position of law that when a substantial justice is pitted against technical consideration, the substantial justice must be given predominance and t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
