9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (3) TMI 1265X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uthorities in terms of Article 141 of the Constitution - Consequently, the impugned orders that have been passed, re-computing the tax payable to give effect to the judgment of the Supreme Court, which the authorities were bound to do, cannot be termed illegal. Time Limitation - HELD THAT:- The decision of the Supreme Court was rendered on 28th October, 2016, the re-computation orders having passed not very long thereafter, in December 2017, and in the absence of any specific period of limitation prescribed for re-computation, it cannot be said that the said orders are time barred. Levy of interest - HELD THAT:- Since the legal position got clarified by the Supreme Court only on 28th October 2016, the Petitioner is justified in co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment dated 28th October, 2016 of the Supreme Court India in Commissioner of Commercial Taxes v. Bajaj Auto Ltd. AIR 2016 SC 5014. 3. The background to these writ petitions is that on 27th February, 2006 an order of assessment was passed by the Sales Tax officer, Sambalpur I Circle, Sambalpur computing the tax demand by holding that surcharge under the OST Act was payable before setting off the entry tax payable. A clarification of the same effect was issued by the State Government on 31st January, 2001. This clarification was challenged by this very Petitioner in a batch of writ petitions which was taken up by this Court and decided on 5th January, 2007 in Bajaj Auto Ltd. v. State of Odisha, 2007 (I) OLR 415. A Division Bench of this Cou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... with the judgment of the Supreme Court, must be given effect to, and no re-computation of tax can be permitted in respect of those AYs. 7. This Court is unable to agree with the above submission. The very basis of the subsequent orders of this Court for the AYs in question, in favour of the assessee, was the judgment dated 5th January 2007 of this Court. In other words, there was no other basis for accepting the plea of the assessee for the AYs in question. That very basis of the orders passed by this Court has been rendered non-existent by the judgment of the Supreme Court in Bajaj Auto Ltd. (supra) setting aside the order dated 5th January, 2007 of this Court. The aforementioned declaration of the law by the Supreme Court is binding o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
