M/S.United Chloro Paraffins PVT.LTD. vs. State Of Odisha

Heard Ms. Kajal Sahoo, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr. S. Mishra, learned Standing Counsel appearing for CT & GST Organization.

The petitioners have filed this writ petition seeking to quash the assessment order dated 07.12.2015 under Annexure-3, by which opposite party no.2-Assessing Authority has directed the petitioner- company to pay Rs.57,645/- as VAT.

Ms. Kajal Sahoo, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners contended that the assessment has been made on the basis of audit report and, as such, the same has been enclosed as Annexure-1 to the writ petition, wherein the finding of the audit report indicates that interest and penalty of Rs.18,109.88 may be demanded under Section 34 of the OVAT Act for delay in filing of returns and admitted tax due of Rs.28,822/- and excess claim of ITC of Rs.53,600/- in periodical return than books of account value. Therefore, it is contended that the petitioner-company has already paid tax amount of Rs.28,822/- which has been adjusted in column no.10 of the order of assessment and the penalty levied under Section 42(5) of the OVAT Act as Rs.57,646/-. It is contended that the petitioner- company is not liable to pay such penalty.

Mr. S. Mishra, learned Standing Counsel appearing for CT & GST Organization contended that the petitioner-company is liable to pay penalty under Section 42(5) of the OVAT Act and, as such, the demand so raised by the assessing authority is well justified. Apart from that, against the order of assessment passed by the assessing authority appeal lies. Instead of filing appeal, the petitioners have approached this Court by filing this writ petition.

Considering the contentions raised by learned counsel for the parties and after going through the records, this Court finds that the petitioner-company has already paid tax amount as per the audit report. But fact remains, the petitioner-company is liable to pay penalty of Rs.57,646/0, as has been determined by the authority, which is subject to filing of appeal. In course of hearing, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners seeks liberty to approach the appellate authority assailing the order dated 07.12.2015 passed by the assessing authority.

In view of such position, this Court disposes of the writ petition granting liberty to the petitioners to pursue their remedy before the appropriate forum. The original copy of the assessment order be returned to the learned counsel for the petitioners after retaining the photocopy of the same.