9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (5) TMI 427X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the review proceedings against the Petitioner by its Assessing Officer is contrary to the provisions of Section 9A(4) of the Electricity Duty Act read with Rules 14(10) and 14(11) of the Electricity Duty Rules, as the proceedings have been initiated by the successor in office of the original Assessing Officer without obtaining previous sanction in writing of Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, and, except for the Assessment Year 2016-17, review proceedings have been initiated beyond the period of limitation of twelve months without obtaining sanction of the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes. HELD THAT:- According to Section 9A(4), the prescribed authority, to review an order, would be the officer who has passed the order or its successor in office. Section 9A(4) of the Electricity Duty Act is to be read with Rules 14(10) and 14(11) of the Electricity Duty Rules, which clearly prescribe that for reviewing any order other than the order passed by the Commissioner, sanction of the Commissioner in writing is required and such review cannot be made beyond the period of 12 months from the date of passing of the order sought to be reviewed, and, an order can be reviewed by the officer w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -5-2023 - HON BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY AND HON BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN For the Petitioner : Mr. Sumeet Gadodia, Advocate Mrs. Shilpi Sandil Gadodia, Advocate Mr. Ranjeet Kushwaha, Advocate Mrs. Akansha Mittal, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Sachin Kumar, AAG-II Mr. Ashok Yadav, GA Mr. Rahul Saboo, G.P.-II The present batch of writ petitions involve common questions of law and with the consent of the parties, the same were heard together and are being disposed of by the instant order. 2. Common issues involved in the writ petitions are Whether initiation of review proceedings against the Petitioner-company was void ab initio and nonest in the eye of law in absence of requisite sanction being obtained by Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Jharkhand in terms of the provisions contained under Section 9A(4) of the Bihar Electricity Duty Act, 1948 (as adopted) read with Rules 14(10) and 14(11) of the Bihar Electricity Duty Rules, 1949 ? Other incidental issue involved is Whether the order passed by the Appellate Authority remanding the matter back to the Assessing Authority for de-novo adjudication is required to be interfered with by this Cour ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3 to 2016-17, the audit objection was categorized by the Assessing Authority under three different heads i.e. (1) Domestic Consumption of electricity, (2) Non-Domestic Consumption of electricity, and (3) Incorrect accounting of charges of electricity. Thus, separate review proceedings were initiated in respect of all the aforesaid categories. 8. Details of the assessment orders including initiation of review proceedings and passing of the review orders have been captured in the following tabulated chart in respect of all the writ petitions:- (i) Details of Proceeding related to Domestic Consumption of Electricity Sl.Nos. Period Case No. Date of Original Assessment order Date of initiation of Review Proceeding Date of Review Order 1. 2012-13 W.P.(T) No. 556 of 2023 22.03.2016 An. 2, Pg.52 20.07.2020 An.3, Pg.55 31.08.2020 An.8, Pg.65 2. 2013-14 W.P.(T) No. 667 of 2023 31.03. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... An.1, Pg.35 17.07.2020 An.2, Pg.38 12.09.2020 An.6, Pg.48 3. 2016-17 W.P.(T) No. 789 of 2023 03.02.2020 An.1, Pg.34 17.07.2020 An.2, Pg.35 12.09.2020 An.6, Pg.45 9. The case of the Petitioner is that the very initiation of the review proceedings against the Petitioner by its Assessing Officer is contrary to the provisions of Section 9A(4) of the Electricity Duty Act read with Rules 14(10) and 14(11) of the Electricity Duty Rules, as the proceedings have been initiated by the successor in office of the original Assessing Officer without obtaining previous sanction in writing of Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, and, except for the Assessment Year 2016-17, review proceedings have been initiated beyond the period of limitation of twelve months without obtaining sanction of the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes. 10. The Petitioner challenged separate review orders passed by the Assessing Authority before the first Appellate Court and specifically contended, inter alia, that initiation of re-assessment proce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... edecessor in office cannot be reviewed by an authority being successor in office except with the previous sanction of the Commissioner. It has been contended that the review orders passed for the assessment years 2012-13 to 2015-16 were not only barred by limitation as the said orders were passed beyond twelve months of passing of the original assessment orders, but also in respect of the said orders which were passed by the successor in office, no previous sanction of the Commissioner was obtained. For the assessment year, 2016-17, it was submitted that the review order was passed within a period of twelve months and was within limitation, but since the said order was passed by the successor-in-office, previous sanction of the Commissioner was required in terms of Rule 14(11) of the Rules, which was not obtained, and, under the said circumstances, review order was not sustainable in the eye of law. Reliance has been placed upon the Judgment passed by Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Tata Steel Ltd., Jamshedpur vs. State of Jharkhand dated 04.12.2019, wherein this Court, by considering the provisions of Section 9A(4) of the Act read with Rules 14(10) and 14(11) o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was contended that in the earlier order passed by this Court in the case of Tata Steel Ltd. (supra) also, the matter has been remanded back to the Assessing Authority and, hence, the Appellate Court has not committed any illegality in remanding the matter back to the Assessing Authority. 15. We have considered rival submissions of the parties and have carefully perused the records of the case including provisions of Section 9A(4) of the Electricity Duty Act and Rules 14(10) and 14(11) of the Excise Duty Rules. Section 9A of the Act reads as under:- 9A. Appeal;-- (1) Any licensee or other person objecting to an order or assessment with or without penalty passed under this Act, or the rules made thereunder may, within a prescribed period and in the prescribed manner, appeal to the prescribed authority against such order of assessment or penalty or both: Provided that no appeal shall be entertained by such authority unless it is satisfied that twenty percentum of the duty assessed or such amount of duty as the appellant may admit to be due from him, whichever is greater has been paid. Provided further that where the prescribed authority revises any order of its m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (10) Save with the previous sanction of the Commissioner recorded, in writing an order, other than order passed by the Commissioner, shall not be reviewed more than twelve months after the date of passing of the order which is sought to be reviewed. (11) No authority below the rank of Commissioner, shall review an order which has been passed by its predecessors in office, except with the previous sanction of the Commissioner. 17. According to Section 9A(4), the prescribed authority, to review an order, would be the officer who has passed the order or its successor in office. Section 9A(4) of the Electricity Duty Act is to be read with Rules 14(10) and 14(11) of the Electricity Duty Rules, which clearly prescribe that for reviewing any order other than the order passed by the Commissioner, sanction of the Commissioner in writing is required and such review cannot be made beyond the period of 12 months from the date of passing of the order sought to be reviewed, and, an order can be reviewed by the officer who is successor in office of the officer who has passed the order sought to be reviewed only with previous sanction of the Commissioner even if the order is sought t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
