9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (8) TMI 887X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2007. In other words, without framing the Rules as directed by the Court no fresh notice of hearing could have been issued. While setting aside the impugned notice dated 20th November, 2007 and permitting the Opposite Parties to issue a fresh notice of hearing in light of the Rules notified on 6 th February, 2010, the Court permits the Petitioner to raise all defences it has both in relation to such reassessment as well as validity of the Rules - Petition disposed off. - W.P.(C) No. 413 of 2008 - - - Dated:- 18-8-2021 - DR. S. MURALIDHAR CHIEF JUSTICE AND B.P. ROUTRAY JUDGE Petitioner Mr. Satyajit Mohanty, Advocate Opposite Parties Mr. Sunil Mishra, Additional Standing Counsel for the Commercial Taxes Department ORDE ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he basis of such statutory rules. 3. It transpires that within a month of the said judgment on 20 th November, 2007 the following impugned notice was issued to the Petitioner by the Sales Tax Officer, Bhadrak Circle, Bhadrak: Sub: Production of books of accounts for the period 2004-05 under O.S.T. Act for reassessment as per judgment of the Hon ble High Court of Orissa, Cuttack. The Hon ble High Court of Orissa, Cuttack in W.P.(C) No.94 of 2007 and No.2774 of 2007 has directed to reassess the case. You are therefore required to appear in person or through authorized agent with accounts and documents for 2004-05 in my Office at Bhadrak on dt. 30.11.2007 at about 11 AM for reassessment, failing which action will be taken as per ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tax (Amendment) Rules, 2010. It purports to make Rule 4-B effective retrospectively from 30th July, 1999 and the remaining rules from 25th February, 2009. 7. Mr. S. Mohanty, learned counsel for the Petitioner states that since the Rules have been made only subsequent to the impugned notice the latter is not sustainable in law. Further he reserves the right of the Petitioner to challenge the aforementioned Rules in accordance with law. 8. Mr. Mishra, learned Additional Standing Counsel for the Opposite Parties states that since the Rules have now been made, the Opposite Parties should be permitted to proceed with the assessment in terms of the judgment of the Supreme Court. 9. Having heard the submissions of learned counsel for the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
