Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
M/S. Hmg Bulk Carriers vs The Learned Rajasthan Tax Board on 11 November, 2021
Bench: Vijay Bishnoi, Anoop Kumar Dhand
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5225/2019
M/s. H.m.g. Bulk Carriers, Through Power Of Attorney Holder
Vishal Kumar Gupta S/o Shri Satish Chandra, Aged About 35
Years, R/o E-371 Sector 1, Shatabdi Nagar, Delhi Road, Meerut,
Uttar Pradesh.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The Learned Rajasthan Tax Board, Ajmer
2. The Excise Commissioner, Government Of Rajasthan,
Excise House, 2- Gumaniyawala, Panchwati, Government
Of Rajasthan, Udaipur (Rajasthan).
3. The District Excise Officer, Udaipur (Rajasthan).
----Respondents
Connected With
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5240/2019
Vimal Jain, Through Power Of Attorney Holder Vishal Kumar
Gupta S/o Shri Satish Chandra, Aged About 35 Years, R/o F-8,
Pratap Vihar Meerut, Uttar Pradesh.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The Learned Rajasthan Tax Board, Ajmer.
2. The Excise Commissioner, Government Of Rajasthan,
Excise House, 2-Gumaniyawala, Panchwati, Government
Of Rajasthan, Udaipur (Rajasthan).
3. The District Excise Officer, Udaipur (Rajasthan).
----Respondents
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5241/2019
M/s. Jain Bulk Movers, Through Power Of Attorney Holder Vishal
Kumar Gupta S/o Shri Satish Chandra, Aged About 35 Years, R/o
F-8, Pratap Vihar, Meerut, Uttar Pradesh.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The Learned Rajasthan Tax Board, Ajmer.
2. The Excise Commissioner, Government Of Rajasthan,
Excise House, 2-Gumaniyawala, Panchwati, Government
(2 of 4) [CW-5225/2019]
Of Rajasthan, Udaipur (Rajasthan).
3. The District Excise Officer, Udaipur (Rajasthan).
----Respondents
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5243/2019
Namrata Jain, Aged About 36 Years, Through Power Of Attorney
Holder Vishal Kumar Gupta S/o Shri Satish Chandra, Aged About
35 Years, R/o F-8, Pratap Vihar, Meerut, Uttar Pradesh.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The Learned Rajasthan Tax Board, Ajmer.
2. The Excise Commissioner, Government Of Rajasthan,
Excise House, 2-Gumaniyawala, Panchwati, Government
Of Rajasthan, Udaipur (Rajasthan).
3. The District Excise Officer, Udaipur (Rajasthan).
----Respondents
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5251/2019
M/s. Madhu Transport, Through Power Of Attorney Holder Vishal
Kumar Gupta S/o Shri Satish Chandra, Aged About 35 Years, R/o
F-8, Pratap Vihar, Meerut, Uttar Pradesh.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The Learned Rajasthan Tax Board, Ajmer.
2. The Excise Commissioner, Government Of Rajasthan,
Excise House, 2- Gumaniyawala, Panchwati, Government
Of Rajasthan, Udaipur (Rajasthan).
3. The District Excise Officer, Udaipur (Rajasthan).
----Respondents
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5268/2019
M/s. Hmg Bulk Carriers, Through Power Of Attorney Holder
Vishal Kumar Gupta S/o Shri Satish Chandra, Aged About 35
Years, R/o Pratap Vihar, Meerut, Uttar Pradesh.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The Learned Rajasthan Tax Board, Ajmer.
2. The Excise Commissioner, Government Of Rajasthan,
Excise House, 2-Gumaniyawala, Panchwati, Government
Of Rajasthan, Udaipur (Rajasthan).
(3 of 4) [CW-5225/2019]
3. The District Excise Officer, Udaipur (Rajasthan).
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ravi Bhansali, Sr. Adv. with
Mr. Mohit Singhvi, Mr. Vipul Dharnia,
Mr. Subham Modi and Mr. Vishwas
Khatri
For Respondent(s) : Mr. M.S. Singhvi, AG (through VC)
with Mr. Kartik Singh Lodha
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND
Judgment / Order
11/11/2021
These writ petitions have been filed by the petitioners
essentially challenging the validity of Section 9-A of the Rajasthan
Excise Act 1950 ('for short the Act of 1950'). The petitioners are
aggrieved with the provision of payment of 75% of the amount of
demand created by the order appeal against.
During the pendency of the writ petitions, Section 9-A of the
Act of 1950 is amended and the requirement of payment of 75%
of the amount of the demand created by the order appeal against
is reduced to 25%.
After attempting to argue the matter on merits for quite
some time, learned counsel appearing for Rajasthan Tax Board,
Ajmer has submitted that on instructions, he does not want to
press these writ petitions, however, seeks liberty for the
petitioners to file fresh appeals against the impugned order dated
31.08.2016 passed by the Excise Commissioner, Udaipur before
the Rajasthan Tax Board, Ajmer. It is also prayed that directions
(4 of 4) [CW-5225/2019]
may be issued to the Rajasthan Tax Board, Ajmer to consider and
decide the appeals on merits within fixed time.
It is noticed that the earlier appeals preferred by the
petitioners against the order dated 31.08.2016 have been
dismissed due to non payment of 75% of the penalty amount.
Mr. M.S. Singhvi, learned AG has no objection if the
Rajasthan Tax Board, Ajmer is directed to consider and decide the
fresh appeals preferred on behalf of the petitioners against the
order dated 31.08.2016 on merits within fixed time.
In view of the above, these writ petitions are dismissed as
not pressed, however, the petitioners are at liberty to file fresh
appeals against the order dated 31.08.2016 before the Rajasthan
Tax Board, Ajmer after payment of 25% of the amount of demand
created by the order dated 31.08.2016 as per the amended
provision of Section 9-A of the Act of 1950.
In the event of filing appeals within a period of one month
from today, the Rajasthan Tax Board, Ajmer shall consider and
decide the same, preferably within a period of four months
thereafter.
(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J (VIJAY BISHNOI),J
9-mohit/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
