M/S Window Glass Ltd vs The Joint Commissioner Of Sales ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 90 Cal/2

OD - 13

                                ORDER SHEET

                               WPO/124/2014
                     IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
                    CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION
                              ORIGINAL SIDE

                    M/S WINDOW GLASS LTD
                             VS
  THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX LYONS RANGE CHARGE &
                            ORS.

  BEFORE:
  The Hon'ble JUSTICE MD. NIZAMUDDIN
  Date: 10th January, 2023.
                                                                        Appearance:
                                                      Mr. Debanuj Basu Thakur, Adv.
                                                                 ...For the Petitioner
                                                                  Mr. A. Ray, Ld. GP
                                                              Mr. T.M. Siddiqui, Adv.
                                                           Mr. Debasish Ghosh, Adv.
                                                                     ...For the State

      The Court: Heard learned advocates appearing for the parties.

      By this writ petition petitioner has challenged the impugned order

dated 6th September, 2012, passed by the revisional Authority confirming

the order of adjudicating authority rejecting the claim of the petitioner under

Section 6(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 relating to the period 2007-

08, by contending that admittedly for the period 2006-07, 2009-10 the said

claim has been allowed and even though not any factual difference is there

in the impugned period. In addition petitioner in support of its contention

relies on an unreported judgment of this Court dated 8th November, 2017 in

W.P. 25160 (W) of 2017 (Wesman Simpson Technologies Pvt. Ltd. vs. Deputy

Commissioner of Sales Tax Ballygunge Charge & Ors.) and submits that the

said case is squarely applicable in the present case of the petitioner.

Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner also relies on a circular in
                                       2


support of its contention dated 4th October, 2010 being Trade Circular No.

11/2010 issued by the Commissioner Commercial Taxes, West Bengal.

      Mr. Ghosh, learned advocate representing the respondents is not in a

position to contradict the allegation of the petitioner and has not been able

to distinguish the aforesaid unreported decision.

Considering the facts and circumstances of this case and submission

of the parties and taking into consideration the aforesaid unreported

decision of this Court as well as the aforesaid circular dated 4th October,

2010, the impugned order dated 6th September, 2012 is set aside and the

matter is remanded back to the revisional Authority concerned to consider

the matter afresh by taking into consideration the aforesaid unreported

decision of this Court dated 8th November, 2017 and the circular dated 4th

October, 2010 and pass a reasoned and speaking order after giving

opportunity of hearing to the petitioner or its authorised representative,

within a period of eight weeks from the date of communication of this order.

With these observations and directions, this writ petition being WPO

124 of 2014 is disposed of.

(MD. NIZAMUDDIN, J.)

TR/