9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (3) TMI 830X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... k as money generating authority. Very often it is noticed by this court that the orders are passed by the respondent authorities in an arbitrary manner which is driving the Tax-payers/dealers to file appeals by depositing 50% of the disputed tax while filing statutory appeals. But for the casual approach of the respondent-authorities, a Tax-payer/dealer cannot be put to hardship. Such action of the respondent-authorities cannot be appreciated. The impugned order dated 21.05.2020 is due of its nature. This is nothing else, but a burden on the business class. This court finds that the officers need to be more vigilant and tax-payers friendly. Accordingly, a cost of Rs. 25,000/- is imposed upon the revisional authority, and the said amount to be paid from his salary to the credit of Tripura High Court Bar Association for passing such orders. Petition allowed. - HON BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING) T. AMARNATH GOUD AND HON BLE MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM LODH For Petitioner(s) : Dr. Ashok Saraf, Sr. Advocate Mr. P. Baruah, Advocate Mr. Kousik Roy, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. K. Dey, Additional GA Judgment Order (Oral) (T. Amarnath Goud, ACJ) Heard Mr. Ashok ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itted that there was no prejudicial to the interest of the State Revenue. Learned senior counsel has lastly urged this court to set aside the impugned show-cause notice dated 21.05.2020 and the impugned order dated 10.12.2020 passed by the respondent no. 2. 5. Learned Additional GA has submitted that the show-cause notice dated 21.05.2020 and the order dated 10.12.2020 passed by the respondent no. 2 are not illegal and the same had been passed within the ambit of law. 6. Considered the submission of learned counsel appearing for the parties. We have also perused the record. 7. From the Assessment Order dated 03.05.2019 issued by the respondent no. 3, it is evident that the petitioner has paid tax for the year 2017-18 (upto 30.06.2017) to the tune of Rs. 33,32,202/-. The computation is reproduced here-in-below: COMPUTATION Assessment Years 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 (upto 30.06.17) Rate of Tax 14.5% 14.5% 14.5% T.O.R. 184348033.08 652525503 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3 herein, since as per respondent no. 2 the assessment order dated 03.05.2019 for the year 2017-18 (upto June, 2017) is prejudicial to the interest of State revenue. The order dated 21.05.2020, is reproduced here-in-below: ORDER 21.05.2020 Whereas, the assessment of M/s Megha Technical Engineers Pvt. Ltd. C/O K.R. Udyog, Near Ginger Hotel, Khejur Bagan, Agartala, Tripura for 2015-16, 2016-17 2017-18 (upto June, 2017) was completed by the Superintendent of Taxes, Charge-V, Agartala on 03.05.2019 AND 2. Whereas, the Superintendent of Taxes, Charge-V, Agartala assessed the dealer under section 31 of the TVAT Act, 2004 for the years 2015-16, 2016-17 2017-18 (upto June, 2017) and raising demand Rs. 11,799/- Rs. 394/- for the eyar 2015-16 2016-17 respectively and determined excess tax paid Rs. 30,25,031/- for the year 2017-18 (upto June, 2017) AND 3. Whereas, the Superintendent of Taxes, Charge-V, Agartala on the said assessment order has mentioned that the dealer has made excess tax payment of Rs. 30,25,031/- for the year 2017-18 (upto June, 2017) and the dealer subsequently submitted an application for refund of the said amoun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ects it is remanded to the Superintendent of Taxes, Charge-V, Agartala for making assessment afresh and to record the tax payment, liability etc. year wise and to pass a detailed and reasoned order within next 3 (three) months after providing the dealer reasonable opportunity of being heard. 11. Section 70(1) of the TVAT Act 2004 says that the Commissioner may call for and examine the record of any proceeding under this Act, and if he considers that any order passed therein by any person appointed under sub-section (1) of section 18 to assist him, is erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of the revenue, he may, after giving the dealer or transporter an opportunity of being heard and after making or causing to be made such enquiry as he deems necessary, pass such orders thereon as the circumstances of the case justify, including an order enhancing or modifying the assessment, or cancelling the assessment and directing a fresh assessment. 12. The petitioner in his reply has urged the respondent no. 2 to exempt him or his representative from personal appearance before him since pandemic situation was prevailing causing him huge business loss and sought for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
