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

Held

The High Court held that it would refrain from exercising its writ jurisdiction in this matter, as the issues raised by the petitioner could be effectively dealt with by the appellate authority. The Court noted the petitioner's contention regarding the subsequent collection of declaration forms. The ratio decidendi is that when an alternative statutory remedy of appeal is available, and the petitioner has grounds to pursue it, including the availability of new evidence, the High Court should direct the petitioner to avail that remedy rather than entertaining a writ petition. The operative direction was to grant the petitioner liberty to file an appeal within two weeks from the date of the order, along with necessary pre-deposit. The pre-deposit was to be calculated after deducting the turnover relatable to the declaration forms to be produced before the First Appellate Authority, whose verification and further directions on pre-deposit were left to that authority. No issue was expressly left undecided.

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, Bhubaneswar, under Rule 12(1)(b) of the Central Sales Tax (Orissa) Rules, 1957. The petitioner contended that subsequent to the assessment order, they collected declaration forms that were previously unavailable and could now be produced. 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 a pre-deposit after deducting the turnover relatable to the declaration forms to be produced before the First Appellate Authority, whose verification and further directions regarding pre-deposit were left to the authority.

Key Issues

1. Whether the High Court should entertain a writ petition challenging an order of provisional assessment when an alternative remedy of appeal is available and the petitioner claims to have subsequently obtained crucial documents (declaration forms) that were not presented earlier. Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner argued that they had collected substantial declaration forms subsequent to the assessment order, which could now be produced. They also raised various other contentions. Revenue's arguments: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the Revenue. However, the Court's decision to direct the petitioner to file an appeal implies that the Revenue's position, or at least the Court's inclination, favored the availability of the appellate remedy.