M/S Utkal Auto, Cuttack vs. Sales Tax Officer, Cuttack
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, M/s Utkal Auto, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 03.02.2023 passed by the Commissioner, CT & GST. The Commissioner had upheld the re-computation of tax liability, holding that surcharge is an additional tax and that entry tax cannot be reduced from the tax payable before the levy of surcharge under Section 5A of the OST Act. This decision affirmed the impugned demands raised by the authorities below. The petitioner contended that this issue was previously decided by this Court in the case of M/s Neelam Motors v. Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax, CT & GST Circle, Balasore.
Held
The Court allowed the writ petition, disposing of it in terms of the order dated 26.08.2021 passed in M/s Neelam Motors (supra). The reasoning is that the revenue did not dispute the petitioner's contention that the issue had already been decided by this Court in the cited case. Therefore, the order of the Commissioner, CT & GST, which re-computed the tax liability without allowing the reduction of entry tax and treating surcharge as an additional tax, was set aside. The operative direction was to dispose of the writ petition in accordance with the precedent. No specific amount in dispute was mentioned, and the tax period was not specified.
Key Issues
1. Whether the Commissioner, CT & GST, erred in upholding the re-computation of tax liability by treating surcharge as an additional tax and disallowing the reduction of entry tax from the tax payable before the levy of surcharge, contrary to established precedent? (Question of law) The petitioner argued that the matter was conclusively settled by this Court's judgment in M/s Neelam Motors v. Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax, CT & GST Circle, Balasore (W.P.(C) No. 14486 of 2021 and batch), disposed of on 26.08.2021. The revenue (Opposite Parties) did not dispute the petitioner's contention.
Sections Cited
Section 5A of the OST Act
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER 14.03.2023 Order No.
This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
Heard Mr. A.K. Panda, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Sunil Mishra, learned Addl. Standing Counsel, CT & GST for the opposite parties.
The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking to quash the order dated 03.02.2023 under Annexure-1, by which the Commissioner, CT & GST, by holding that re-computation of tax liability has been done as per the ruling that surcharge is nothing but an additional tax, and that a dealer is not entitled for reduction of the amount of entry tax from the amount of tax payable before the levy of surcharge under Section 5A of the OST Act, has declined to interfere with the orders of forum below in raising the impugned demands by computation of tax liability afresh.
Mr. A.K. Panda, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the matter has been set at rest by the judgment of this Court in the case of M/s Neelam Motors v. Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax, CT & GST Circle, Balasore (W.P.(C) No. 14486 of 2021 and batch disposed of on 26.08.2021. 5. Mr. Sunil Mishra, learned Addl. Standing Counsel, CT & GST appearing for the opposite parties has not disputed the contention raised by learned counsel for the petitioner.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after going through the records, this writ petition stands disposed of in terms of the order dated 26.08.2021 passed by this Court in M/s Neelam Motors (supra).
Issue urgent certified copy as per rules.
Ashok
(DR. B.R. SARANGI)
JUDGE
(M.S. RAMAN)
JUDGE
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.