Vvf (India) Limited vs The State Of Maharashtra And 4 Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 876 Bom

ppn                                   1                 5.wp-2911.19.doc


         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
             ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

                       WRIT PETITION NO.2911 OF 2019

VVF (India) Limited                                    .. Petitioner
      Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Ors.                        .. Respondents

            ---
Mr.Sriram Sridharan for the petitioner.
Mr.Dushyant Kumar, AGP for the respondent nos.1 to 5-State.
            ---
                         CORAM : R.D. DHANUKA AND
                                        N.R. BORKAR, JJ.

                      DATE          : 24th January 2022
                                (Through Video Conferencing)

P.C.:-


.               Rule. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent nos.1 to

5 waives service. By consent of parties, petition is heard finally.

2. By this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India, the petitioner has prayed for a writ of certiorari for quashing and

setting aside the impugned letter dated 25th September 2019 passed by

the respondent no.3 rejecting the appeal filed by the petitioner on the

ground that the petition was not accompanied by requisite payment of

10% of disputed amount of tax as required by Section 26(6A) of the

Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002 (for short "the said MVAT Act,

2002").

ppn 2 5.wp-2911.19.doc

3. Mr.Sridharan, learned counsel for the petitioner strongly

placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court delivered

on 3rd December 2021 in case of VVF (India) Limited Vs. The State of

Maharashtra & Ors. in Civil Appeal No.7387 of 2021 holding that

amount which was paid under protest shall be taken into consideration

while considering the amount as pre-deposit under Section 26(6A). If

such amount is taken into account, the provisions of the statute were

duly complied with. The Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the appeal

would have to be restored to the file of the appellate authority subject to

due verification that 10% of the amount of tax disputed, as interpreted

by the terms of the said judgment has been duly deposited by the

appellant.

4. In view of the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme

Court, this Court on 17th January 2022 granted time to the learned

counsel for the State to consider the said judgment and to make

appropriate statement before this Court as to whether the issue involved

in this petition is covered by the said judgment or not.

5. Mr. Kumar, learned AGP for the State, on instructions, states

that the respondents have no objection if the amount deposited by the

ppn 3 5.wp-2911.19.doc

petitioner under protest is considered as pre-deposit as a condition

precedent under Section 26(6A) of the MVAT Act, 2002.

6. Mr. Sridharan, learned counsel for the petitioner invited our

attention to the averments made by the petitioner in paragraph 13 of the

writ petition and would submit that for the assessment year 2012-13, the

petitioner has already made paymen and more particularly

Rs.3,00,00,000/- as tax and Rs.2,04,25,021/- as interest for the same

assessment year i.e. 2012-13. He, on instructions, fairly states that the

respondents can verify the said payment already made by the petitioner

and if any other amount is required to be deposited, the petitioner would

deposit the same within two weeks from the date of communication with

the respondents. Statement is accepted.

7. In our view, the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in

case of VVF (India) Limited (supra) would apply to the facts of this

case. We are respectfully bound by the said judgment.

8. We therefore pass the following order :-

(i) The impugned letter dated 25th September 2019 annexed at

Exhibit 'A' to the petition is quashed and set aside.

 ppn                                           4                5.wp-2911.19.doc


(ii)     Appeal filed by the petitioner bearing No.JC/App-V/VAT/CT/ 149/

         2018-18 stands restored to file.



(iii)    The respondents               to inform the petitioner    about the amount

required to be deposited, if any, after verification whether the

petitioner has already deposited the said amount under protest

within one week from today.

(iv) The petitioner shall deposit the balance amount, if any, within two

weeks from the date of receipt of such communication. The

respondents shall hear the said appeal on its own merits and in

accordance with law without being influenced by the observations

made and conclusion drawn in the impugned letter dated 25th

September 2019.

(v) Writ petition is allowed in aforesaid terms. Rule is made absolute

accordingly. No order as to costs.

(vi) Parties to act on the authenticated copy of this order.

                   N.R. BORKAR, J.                      R.D. DHANUKA, J.