M/S. Rashi Steels, Sundargarh vs. Commr. Of Sales Tax (CT And GST), Odisha
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER 12.10.2023 04. 1. The matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
Heard Mr. Kshirod Kumar Sahoo, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. Sunil Mishra, learned Standing Counsel for Sales Tax Department.
By way of this writ petition, the Petitioner has prayed for quashing of the notice dated 7th December, 2022 issued by the Sales Tax Officer, Rourkela-II Circle, Panposh (Annexure-1 to the writ petition) intimating the Petitioner to pay the outstanding/arrear dues.
Mr. Mishra, learned Standing Counsel for the Sales Tax Department with reference to the letter dated 21st September, 2023 received from the Section Officer (Law), Commissionerate of CT and GST, Odisha at Cuttack, which he has produced in Court today, submits that since the Petitioner has already filed 2nd appeal before
the Odisha Sales Tax Tribunal (OSTT), Cuttack vide SA No.29(V) of 2022 for the tax periods from 1st April, 2013 to 31st March, 2015 against the order dated 27th January, 2022 passed by the 1st Appellate Authority, which is pending for consideration and as per the debarring provisions under the OVAT Act, the outstanding amount demanded by the impugned notice dated 7th December, 2022 for the aforesaid tax periods cannot be recovered. The letter produced in Court today by Mr. Mishra is taken on record.
Mr. Mishra further contended that so far as the second part of other outstanding arrears demanded as per the impugned notice dated 7th December, 2022 is concerned, the same is liable to be recovered and the petitioner-assessee should clear the dues.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after going through the records, it is seen that against the first part of demand of Rs.72,23,462/- for the tax periods from 1st April, 2013 to 31st March, 2015 as per the impugned demand notice dated 7th December 2022, the Assessee-Petitioner has approached the Odisha Sales Tax Tribunal in SA No.29(V) of 2022 invoking Section 78 of the Odisha Value Added Tax Act, 2004. In this regard sub-section (6) of Section 78 as substituted by virtue of the Odisha Value Added Tax (Amendment) Act, 2017, is taken note of. Said sub-section (6) reads as follows: “(6) The Tribunal shall not entertain any appeal preferred by a dealer unless it is accompanied by satisfying proof of payment of twenty per centum of the tax or interest or both in dispute as determined under sub-section (7) of Section 77:
Provided that, on payment of twenty per centum of the tax or interest or both, in dispute, realization of the balance tax, interest or penalty, as the case may be, under dispute shall be deemed to be stayed in full till disposal of the appeal by the Tribunal. Explanation.— The payment of twenty per centum of the tax or interest or both in dispute shall be such including the amount deposited under sub-section (4) of Section 77.”
Since the aforementioned dues to the tune of Rs.72,23,462/- relating to the tax periods from 10.04.2013 to 31.03.2015 is sub judice before the Tribunal, it cannot be adjudicated here.
So far as the second part of the outstanding open arrear dues as per the impugned demand notice i.e. for the periods from 1st April, 2007 to 31st March, 2012 (OVAT), 1st April, 2013 to 31st March, 2014 (OVAT), 1st April, 2016 to 30th June, 2017 (CST) and 2002- 03 (CST) are concerned, the Petitioner-Assessee is liable to clear the same in terms of the Notice dated 07.12.2022. 8. In the result, the first part of the impugned notice dated 07.12.2022 so far as it relates to recovery of arrear to the tune of Rs.72,23,462/- pertaining to the tax periods from 01.04.2013 to 31.03.2015, the same would abide by the provisions of Section 78(6) of the OVAT Act. However, as regards other part of the arrear dues is concerned, the petitioner has not placed any material to show that such amount(s) is sub judice or varied by any competent court of law.
In that view of the matter, the writ petition is partly allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.
(DR. B. R. SARANGI) ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
(M. S. RAMAN) JUDGE M. Panda
Reproduced from the public record of the Orissa High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.