M/S.Millenium Products And Services vs. The Sales Tax Officer,CT And GST Circle

Held

The Court held that it would refrain from exercising its writ jurisdiction in the matter, finding that all issues could be effectively dealt with by the appellate authority. The Court granted the petitioner liberty to file an appeal within two weeks from the date of the order. The petitioner was permitted to make the necessary pre-deposit after deducting the turnover relatable to the declaration forms that would be produced before the First Appellate Authority. The First Appellate Authority was directed to verify this calculation and pass further directions regarding the pre-deposit. The original assessment order was to be returned to the petitioner upon substitution with photocopies for the purpose of filing the appeal. The interlocutory application was disposed of in view of the order passed in the writ petition.

Facts

The petitioner filed a writ application challenging an order of provisional assessment dated 29.06.2018, passed by the Sales Tax Officer, CT & GST Circle, Bhubaneswar-IV, under Rule 12(1)(b) of the Central Sales Tax (Orissa) Rules, 1957. The petitioner contended that subsequent to the assessment order, they collected a substantial number of declaration forms which were available for production. The petitioner also raised other contentions. The High Court, while refraining from exercising its writ jurisdiction, granted the petitioner liberty to file an appeal within two weeks from the date of the order. The petitioner was directed to make necessary pre-deposit after deducting the turnover relatable to the declaration forms to be produced before the First Appellate Authority, whose verification would be subject to further directions regarding pre-deposit.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner should be allowed to file an appeal against the provisional assessment order despite the writ petition being filed initially? 2. Whether the petitioner is entitled to produce subsequently collected declaration forms before the appellate authority and have the pre-deposit amount adjusted accordingly? Petitioner's contentions: The petitioner argued that they had collected substantial declaration forms after the assessment order was passed and these forms were available for production. They also raised other contentions. The petitioner sought to avail the opportunity to present these forms and have the pre-deposit calculated based on them. Revenue's contentions: The judgment does not record any specific contentions from the Revenue. It notes that learned Senior Standing counsel for the Revenue was heard.