Jharkhand High Court
M/S. Shivam Enterprises vs The State Of Jharkhand on 4 May, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P (T) No. 1458 of 2021
M/s. Shivam Enterprises, through its Proprietor
Shri Pradeep Kumar --- --- Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, having
its Office at Project Bhawan, HEC Dhurwa, Ranchi
3. The Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Appeals),
Hazaribagh (Jharkhand)
4. The Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Hazaribagh
Circle, District-Hazaribagh
5. The Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes,
Hazaribagh Circle, District-Hazaribagh --- --- Respondents
---
CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Deepak Roshan
---
Through : Video Conferencing
For the Petitioner: : M/s. Nitin Kumar Pasari & Sidhi Jalan, Advocates
For the Respondents : Mr. Salona Mittal, A.C to G.A.-I
----
10 /04.05.2022 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. Petitioner is before this Court as the learned Commercial Taxes Tribunal
in its impugned judgment dated 27th January, 2020 (Annexure-7) dismissed the
Revision Application no. HZ 99 of 2014 refusing to interfere in the order dated
15th July, 2014 passed by learned JCCT (Appeals), Hazaribagh Division,
Hazaribagh (Annexure-4), whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner under
Section 79(3) of the JVAT Act, 205 was dismissed only on the ground of non-
deposit of 20% of the tax assessed. Learned Tribunal, however, gave liberty to
the petitioner to move before Appellate Authority by depositing 20% of the
assessed tax and in that case the Appellate Authority was asked to proceed, in
accordance with law. Petitioner had deposited Rs. 1,28,000/- which is 25% of
the assessed tax as per page-65 Challan in terms of the interim order dated
8th April, 2015 passed by learned Tribunal in the pending revision on
28th April, 2015. The total tax amount is Rs. 5,11,402/- as per the assessment
order dated 15th March, 2014 (Annexure-2).
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that learned Tribunal
did not take notice of proof of deposit of 25% of the amount of the assessed tax
in terms of Section 79(3) of JVAT Act and erroneously dismissed the revision
petition. There is no question of making a fresh deposit for the petitioner to
avail the appellate remedy. Therefore, petitioner has approached this Court.
4. Respondents have filed counter affidavit. Interim order dated 8 th April,
2015 passed by learned Tribunal and deposit made through Challan at Page-65
of an amount of Rs. 1,28,000/- against the assessed tax of Rs. 5,11,402/- has
not been specifically disputed though relying upon the provisions of Section
79(3) of JVAT Act, the respondents have taken stand that the appeal before
JCCT (Appeals) could not be admitted on failure to deposit Rs. 20% of the tax
assessed.
5. It appears that the issue has unnecessary dragged the parties to this Court
simply on account of an error of record on the part of the learned Tribunal.
Considering the fact that the petitioner has submitted proof of deposit of Rs.
1,28,000/- i.e., 25% of the assessed tax deposited in April, 2015, the matter
requires consideration by JCCT (Appeals). Since the litigation has consumed
sufficient time, no purpose would be served by remanding the matter to the
Commercial Taxes Tribunal when the main appeal requires consideration by
JCCT (Appeals) on merits. The observations of learned Tribunal regarding
rejection of the appeal on the ground of failure to make pre-deposit do not stand
in the aforesaid circumstances undisputed by the respondents.
Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of.
(Aparesh Kumar Singh, J)
(Deepak Roshan, J)
jk/
