Sai Nath Traders vs The State Of Assam And 5 Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 4758 Gua

Gauhati High Court

Sai Nath Traders vs The State Of Assam And 5 Others on 28 November, 2023

Author: Devashis Baruah

Bench: Devashis Baruah

                                                            Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010265452023




                      THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
  (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                         Case No. : WP(C)/6862/2023

         SAI NATH TRADERS
         KABAITARY, JOGIGHOPA,
         BONGAIGAON, ASSAM, PIN- 783382,
         REPRESENTED BY SANJAY KUMAR SARKAR,
         AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE,
         SON OF SUNIL KUMAR SARKAR,
         AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS,
         RESIDENT OF A-703, GOKUL NIWAS,
         PANDU PORT ROAD, ADABARI,
         GUWAHATI, KAMRUP(M), 781012.



         VERSUS

         THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 OTHERS
         REPRESENTED BY COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE
         GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM,
         FINANCE DEPARTMENT, ASSAM SECRETARIAT,
         DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 781006.

         2:THE COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAXES
          GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM
          OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF TAXES
         ASSAM

         KAR BHAWAN
         DISPUR
         GUWAHATI- 781006.

         3:THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF TAXES
          GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM
          KAR BHAWAN
          DISPUR
                                                                       Page No.# 2/4

           GUWAHATI- 781006.

           4:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAXES

           CENTRAL VAT AUDIT CELL
           KAR BHAWAN

           DISPUR
           GUWAHATI- 781006.

           5:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF STATE TAXES
            CENTRAL VAT AUDIT CELL
            KAR BHAWAN
            DISPUR
            GUWAHATI- 781006.

           6:THE INSPECTOR OF TAXES

           KABAITARY CHECK POST
           JOGIGHOPA

           DISTRICT- BONGAIGAON
           PIN- 783382

For the Petitioner (s)       : Mr. H.K. Das, Advocate.
                                Mr. S.P. Sharma, Advocate.


For the Respondent (s)      :

                                   BEFORE
                HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH
                                   ORDER

28.11.2023

Issue notice making it returnable by 8th of January, 2024.

2. Mr. H.K. Das, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner submits that all the Respondents herein are normally represented by the Finance and Taxation Department of the Government of Assam and their names have been duly reflected in the cause list. Be that as it may, it is seen that the Page No.# 3/4

Standing Counsel for the Finance and Taxation Department of the Government of Assam is not present when the matter has been called. This Court grants the liberty to the Petitioner to take steps upon the Standing Counsel for the Finance and Taxation Department of the Government of Assam and serve extra copies of the writ petition by 30.11.2023.

3. This Court have also heard on the question of interim prayer.

4. The case of the Petitioner herein is that the Respondent No. 3 had exercised the power purportedly under Section 82 of the Assam Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (in short ' the Act of 2003') He submits that for exercising the suo-moto revisional powers under Sub-Section (1) of Section 82 of the Act of 2003, the order of assessment has to be erroneous and should be prejudicial to the interest of the revenue.

5. The learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that a perusal of the impugned order dated 20.10.2023 wouldshow that the order which have been sought to be revised is neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. The learned counsel referring to the various judgments of this Court submitted that these twin conditions have to be satisfied before exercising the powers underSection 82 of the Act of 2003. The learned counsel submits that upon passing the impugned order dated 20.10.2023 the Respondent Authorities are now proceeding to assess the Petitioner for the period 2015-16 and as such the said assessment proceedings so initiated ought to be stayed pending disposal of the instant writ petition.

6. This Court having heard the learned counsels for the parties is of the opinion that the question as to whether the twin conditions for exercise of the suo moto revisional powers were there or not can only be decided upon Page No.# 4/4

hearing the Respondent Authorities. It is the opinion of this court that it would not be in the interest of justice to stay the assessment proceedings which have been initiated on the basis of the impugned order dated 20.10.2023. Be that as it may, this Court however observes that if in the assessment proceedings any demand is raised upon the Petitioner, this Court directs the Respondents not to give effect to the said Demand till the next date. This Court further makes it clear that the impugned order dated 20.10.2023 as well as the assessment so proposed to be carried out on the basis thereof shall be subject to the outcome of the writ petition.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant