The High Court of Jharkhand, while dismissing a petition filed by the State of Jharkhand primarily assailing the order dated 28.02.2020 passed by the Commercial Taxes Tribunal wherein the learned Tribunal allowed the revision applications filed by Respondent No.1, and in consequence thereof, quashed and set aside the orders passed by the Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, held that the Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes acted in undue haste in disposing of the revision applications.
Brief Facts:
For the Assessment Year 2013-14, an assessment order dated 04.01.2017 was passed by the Assessing Officer, pursuant to which, an excess Demand Notice was issued, wherein a sum of Rs. 1,41,73,237/- was determined to be refundable to Respondent No.1. Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes verified the said application for refund and forwarded both the applications for refund, along with comment that refund should be granted. However, J.C.C.T. (Administration), instead of granting the refund, directed to initiate review proceedings against the original Assessment Orders. Later, the review proceedings were dropped. However, later, the Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes set aside the original assessment orders. Aggrieved, Respondent No. 1 approached the Commercial Taxes Tribunal where the original assessment orders were restored. Hence, the present writ petition.
Contentions of the Petitioners:
The Learned Counsel for the Petitioners contended that the learned Tribunal had committed a grave error in setting aside the order passed by the Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, as said order was merely a remand order remanding the matters back to the Adjudicating Authority for re-assessment.
Contentions of the Respondents:
The Learned Counsel for the Respondents contended that the orders passed by the Learned Tribunal are reasoned and speaking orders after due examination of the relevant records of the case and statutory provisions as contained under the JVAT Act and Rules, and the same are not liable to be interfered by this Hon’ble Court.
Observations of the court:
The court noted that the original assessment orders have been passed by examining each and every expense incurred relating to works contract, like labor, services, and other like charges statutorily qualified for deduction from gross turnover for determining the taxable value of transfer of property in goods
The Court observed that an authority appointed under the JVAT Act may review its order if, in the opinion of the said authority, the order is necessary to be reviewed on account of a mistake that is apparent from the records of the case. Rules 54(2) and 54(3) specifically provide that proceeding for initiation of review beyond the period of one year or by the successor in the interest of the officer who has passed the original order, shall not be initiated with the previous sanction of the Commissioner or the authority specially authorized by him in this behalf. The Court said that the Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes acted in undue haste in disposing of the revision applications. If an authority acts in undue haste, malice in law is to be presumed and his action is deemed to be mala fide.
The decision of the Court:
The court, dismissing the petition, held that there is no merit in the writ petition.
Case Title: State of Jharkhand vs M/s. Ram Kripal Singh Construction Pvt. Ltd.
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rongon Mukhopadhyay and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Roshan
Case No.: W.P. (T) No. 3229 of 2020
Advocate for the Petitioner: Mr. Mrinal Kanti Roy
Advocate for the Respondent: Mrs. Shilpi Sandil Gadodia
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :
