Dr. Amrit Lal Isharat Memorial Sun ... vs State Of U.P. And Others
2012 Latest Caselaw 42 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 32
 

 
Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 427 of 2012
 

 
Petitioner :- Dr. Amrit Lal Isharat Memorial Sun Beem School
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Others
 
Petitioner Counsel :- Shashi Kumar
 
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Ashok Bhushan,J.

Hon'ble Prakash Krishna,J.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri S.P. Kesharwani, learned Addl. Chief Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents.

By this petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the notice dated 20th March, 2012 issued under Section 28(3) of U.P. VAT Act, for the assessment year 2008-09, Annexure-5 to the writ petition.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not liable to pay any VAT tax as he is not a registered dealer within the meaning of Section 2h of VAT Act. It is submitted that the petitioner is an institution basically engaged in imparting education and therefore, the notice is liable to be discharged. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has filed reply to the Deputy Commissioner, Commercial Tax, Range 12, Varanasi (respondent no. 3) vide his reply dated 30.01.2012. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon a decision of Uttaranchal High Court in the case of M/s Scholors Home Senior Secondary School v. State of Uttarakhand and another in Writ Petition No. 1611 of 2009 (M/S) along with other connected writ petitions decided on 7th July, 2011.

Sri S.P. Kesharwani, learned counsel for the respondents submits that the facts are required to be looked into before taking a final decision regarding applicability of the VAT Act on the petitioner. He submits that limitation for assessment has been extended by three months i.e. 30th June, 2012 and on the request of petitioner, 10th April, 2012 has been fixed in the matter.

Considering the facts that the petitioner has filed reply to the respondent no. 3 raising objections regarding applicability of the VAT Act, we are of the view that respondent no. 3 may consider the reply of the petitioner including objections regarding applicability of the VAT Act in consequence to the notice while taking final decision in the matter.

With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is disposed of.

(Prakash Krishna,J)             (Ashok Bhushan,J)

Order Date :- 9.4.2012

MK/