9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (4) TMI 676X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itioner can therefore be granted - petition dismissed - decided against petitioner. - Writ Petition (M/S) No. 634 of 2017, Writ Petition (M/S) No. 639 of 2017 - - - Dated:- 28-3-2017 - Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. Mr. Sharad Sharma, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Anchit Khokher, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Syed Nadim, Standing Counsel, Mr. B.S. Parihar, Central Government Standing Counsel for the Union of India/respondent ORDER Hon ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral) In the above two writ petitions, the petitioner is challenging the reassessment proceedings initiated by the respondents under Section 29 of the Uttarakhand VAT Act (from hereinafter referred to as the Act ). Writ petition (M/S) No. 634 of 2017 relates to th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as been taken and thereafter reasons have been assigned as to why reassessment is being done. 4. The case of the department is that Form-C by which the petitioner has been given the benefit of 4% tax rebate was not liable to be given to the petitioner, and therefore, the proceedings for reassessment were initiated. The reassessment orders are dated 21.02.2016 (in WPMS No. 639 of 2017 and 29.03.2016 in WPMS No. 634 of 2017), which have been challenged by the petitioner in appeal under Section 51 of the Act, which is still pending before the Joint Commissioner (Appeal) II, Commercial Tax, Haridwar. 5. The limited question before this Court is that at the time of the hearing of the appeal the liability against the petitioner as per the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eassessment proceedings are required. In fact, reassessment orders have already been challenged by the petitioner before the appellate court, which are pending, submits the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner. 8. Learned State Counsel relies upon Section 51 (4) of the Act which categorically states that the appeal can only be entertained if the amount of tax due on the turnover sale or purchase, as the case might be, is deposited. This as per the reassessment orders would be ₹ 21,26,816/- in WPMS No.634 of 2017 and ₹ 16,96,660/- in WPMS No. 639 of 2017, which the petitioner admittedly has failed to do so. Therefore, he has not complied with sub-section (4) of Section 51 of the Act. In the case of the petitioner, not onl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
