9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2023 (9) TMI 860X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order passed by the Gujarat Value Added Tax Tribunal dated 14.08.2008 and First Appeal order dated 17.04.2008 passed by the learned Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Tax, (Appeal-4), Vadodara and Assessment Order dated 31.03.2007 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Tax, (Unit-7), Vadodara and First Appeal order dated 11.09.2020 passed in remand proceedings by Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Tax, (Appeal-5), Vadodara. [2] The petitioners have prayed for the following reliefs: "18(A) YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or writ in the nature of mandamus or any other writ, orders or directions to quash and set aside the impugned assessment order dated 31.03.2007 passed by Assistant Commissioner of Comm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... proper, in the facts and circumstances of the present case." [3] Heard the learned advocate Mr. Hiren Trivedi for the petitioners and Ms. Shrunjal Shah, learned AGP for the respondents. [4] The brief facts leading to the present petition are as under: 4.1 The petitioner Company was established on 31st March, 1986, inter alia, engaged in the business of manufacturing of polymer plastic bags. The petitioner company is a registered company under the Act as well as the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the 'CST Act'). The petitioner company also obtained fresh registration as per amendment in Section 30A vide Gujarat Sales Tax (Second Amendment) Act, 2001 and the petitioner was granted a new registration number beari ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5. Vide order dated 14.08.2008, the Tribunal has set aside the impugned order dated 17.04.2008 and remanded back the matter to the Appellate Authority for its fresh decision. Thereafter, the Deputy State Tax Commissioner (Appeal- 5) - respondent no. 4 passed the order dated 11.09.2020, whereby the assessment order was restored and the appeal of the petitioner was dismissed. Against the said order, the petitioners are before this Court. [5] The respondent Authority has submitted Affidavit-in-reply and has vehemently contested this petition and one of the contentions is that the petitioner has efficacious alternative remedy to approach the Tribunal challenging the order dated 11.09.2020 passed by the First Appellate Authority under Section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
