Rajesh Oram vs. The Commnr. Of Commercial Taxes And GST, Odisha

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

Heard Mr. R.P. Kar, learned Senior Advocate appearing along with Mr. B.P. Mohanty, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Sunil Mishra, learned ASC for CT & GST Organization.

The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking direction to opposite parties 1 and 2 not to take measures to recover the amount of tax and penalty as per Annexure-1 series as the petitioner is not the proprietor of M/s. Jayguru Traders and to quash the orders of assessment under Annexure-1 series levying and demanding tax and penalty for the default of opposite party nos. 4 to 6 and to hold that the opposite parties 1 and 2 are responsible for allowing the opposite party nos. 4 to 6 escape from the clutches of the department, who have defaulted in payment of tax as alleged by the assessing authority.

Mr. R.P. Kar, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner contended that similar matter had come up for consideration before the apex Court in the case of Commissioner of Trade and Taxes Delhi v. Arise India Limited, 2018 SCC OnLine SC 3859, wherein the apex Court did not incline to interfere with the impugned order. He further contended that since the question which has been evolved in the present case has been decided in the said order, therefore, this writ petition may be disposed of in terms of the order passed in the said case.

Mr. S. Mishra, learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for CT & GST organization contended that against assessment order, even though appeal lies, the petitioner has approached this Court directly. He further contended that the grievance which has been raised in this writ petition can very well be raised before the appellate authority. He also contended that the issue involved in this writ petition was there before the apex Court in the case of the State of Karnataka v. M/s. Ecom Gill Coffee Trading Private Limited (Civil Appeal No. 230 of 2023 disposed of vide order dated 13.03.2023), wherein the appeal filed by the State of Karnataka was allowed. Therefore, if the petitioner has any grievance, he should have approached the Appellate Authority, so that the appellate authority can consider the same in accordance with law.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after going through the record, as it appears since there is dispute with regard to purchase of the petitioner and the applicability of the provisions of law and, as such, there is availability of appeal provision, this writ petition stands disposed of permitting the petitioner to prefer an appeal and while considering the appeal, the Appellate Authority shall take into consideration the judgments cited by the petitioner as well as opposite parties before this Court and pass appropriate order in accordance with law. As prayed for by learned counsel for the petitioner, the certified copy of the order of assessment be returned to the petitioner after keeping authenticated photocopy thereof.