9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (11) TMI 607X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Act, 2005. However, it is worth noting that the orders passed by the Appellate Deputy Commissioner were not challenged before the Tribunal under Section 48(2) of the Act, 2005 and there is no explanation in this regard. Consequently, in the opinion of this Court, the notices issued by respondent No. 2/Commissioner exercising the power under Section 49(3) of the Act, 2005, are legally unsustainable in the eyes of the law. The impugned notices dated 05.11.2018 and 29.01.2019 issued under Section 49(3) of the Chhattisgarh Value Added Tax Act, 2005 by respondent No. 2-Commissioner, Commercial Tax, Raipur are hereby quashed - Petition allowed. - HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAKESH MOHAN PANDEY For Petitioner : Mr. Manoj Paranjpe, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Ajay Kumrani, Panel Lawyer ORDER ON BOARD 1) Since common questions of law and facts are involved in the above-captioned writ petitions, therefore they are clubbed together, heard together and disposed of by common order. 2) These petitions have been preferred against the notices dated 05.11.2018 and 29.01.2019 issued under Section 49(3) of the Chhattisgarh Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (for short, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... according to the provisions of Section 48 (7) of the Act, 2005, if any order is passed by the Appellate Deputy Commissioner, such order shall subject to the provisions of sub-section (2) of this Section or subsection (1) of Section 49, as the case may be, be final. He would also submit that from the language employed under Section 49(3) of the Act, 2005, the revisional power can be exercised by the revisional authority if any order has been passed by any person appointed under Section 3 of the Act, 2005 to assist him including any officer to whom he has delegated his powers. He would further contend that the Appellate Deputy Commissioner was not appointed by the Commissioner or by the department to assist the Commissioner, therefore, such authority is not subordinate to the Commissioner, and any order passed by the Deputy Commissioner would not be revisable before the Commissioner. He would also contend that against the order passed by the Appellate Deputy Commissioner, there is a remedy to prefer appeal according to the provisions of Section 48(2) of the Act, 2005; therefore, the Commissioner committed an error of law by exercising the revisional power. In support of his argument, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (1) of section 49, as the case may be, shall be final, and in the case of an order passed by the Board, such order shall, subject to the provisions of section 55 be final. 9) Section 48(3) of the Act, 2005 reads as under:- (3). Notwithstanding anything contained in the rules or the regulations framed by the [Tribunal] under any law for the time being in force, any officer not below the rank of deputy commissioner duly authorized by the commissioner in this behalf shall also have the right to be heard at the hearing of the appeal under sub-section (2). 10) Section 49(3) of the Act, 2005 reads thus:- (3) The commissioner may on his own motion or on information received call for and examine the record of any proceeding under this Act if he considers that any order passed therein by any person appointed under section 3 to assist him including any officer to whom he has delegated his powers under subsection (1) is erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of the revenue, and he may, after giving the dealer or person a reasonable opportunity of being heard, and after making or causing to be made such enquiry as he deems necessary, pass within one cale ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Act, 2005. The provisions of appeal and revision are entirely different, while exercising the appellate power; the appellate Authority may go through the entire material including the evidence part but while exercising the revisional power the Court/authority has to see the legality of the order and the entire material cannot be assessed. When an order is passed by the appellate authority under Section 48(1) of the Act, 2005, the same would be appealable according to the provisions of Section 48 (2) of the Act, 2005, but in the present case, the revenue did not prefer any appeal against that order and the commissioner exercising revisional power, issued notice under Section 49(3) of the Act to the petitioner. 15) Section 49 (3) of the Act, 2005 clearly says that the Commissioner, on his own motion or upon receiving information, has the authority to review the records of any proceeding conducted under this Act. If the Commissioner finds that an order passed by an officer appointed under Section 3 to assist him or by an officer to whom the power has been delegated, is erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of the revenue, he may, after giving a reasonable ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... discussion, in the back drop of statutory provisions, we have no hesitation to answer the question in favour of the petitioner and against the revenue. Even otherwise, it is well established that every taxing statute must be read according to the natural construction of its words. It is now well established that if a person sought to be taxed comes within the letter of the law, he must be taxed. Onthe other hand, if the revenue is to recover tax, cannot bring the subject within the letter of law, the subject is free, however apparently within the spirit of law the case might otherwise appear to be. 17) Now coming to the judgment relied on by counsel for the respondent, in the matter of Commissioner of Sales Tax, Orrisa (supra), the Hon ble Supreme Court in para-11 held as under:- So far as the second reasoning given by the High Court that the proviso to clause (a) of sub-section (4) of Section 23 of the Act places limitation on the Commissioner's suo motu revisional powers to revise an appellate order is concerned, a reading of the aforesaid proviso would show that the limitation on the revisional power of the Commissioner comes is only where a dealer or person filin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
