M/S.Visa Steel LTD. vs. Sales Tax Officer

Facts

The Petitioner, M/s. Visa Steel Ltd., filed a writ petition challenging an order dated January 19, 2018, passed by the Sales Tax Officer, Jajpur Circle, Jajpur Road. This order rejected the Petitioner's claim for a refund for the period from April 1, 2011, to March 31, 2012. The claim was made under Section 35(4)(c) of the Odisha Entry Tax Act, 1999, read with Rule 30(3)(d) of the Odisha Entry Tax Rules, 1999. The Petitioner contended that a circular issued by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Odisha, on January 7, 2017, regarding refund processing rendered a revision petition futile. The Opposite Parties, represented by the Sales Tax Department, argued that the impugned order was not passed pursuant to that circular and that the revisional authority is the Additional Commissioner, who would consider the petition on its merits.

Held

The Court acknowledged the Petitioner's challenge to the order dated January 19, 2018, rejecting their refund claim. While the Petitioner argued that a circular issued by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes rendered a revision petition futile, the Opposite Parties pointed out that the impugned order was not passed pursuant to that circular and that the revisional authority is the Additional Commissioner. The Court found merit in the argument that the Additional Commissioner could consider the revision petition on its merits. Therefore, the Court directed that the Petitioner be permitted to file a revision petition before the Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes by May 3, 2021. Any delay in filing the revision petition due to the pendency of the writ petition would be considered by the Additional Commissioner. The Additional Commissioner was directed to dispose of the revision petition on its own merits by August 2, 2021, notwithstanding the circular issued by the Commissioner, which was described as clarificatory by the Opposite Parties. The Court did not decide the merits of the refund claim itself.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Petitioner's claim for refund for the period April 1, 2011, to March 31, 2012, under Section 35(4)(c) of the Odisha Entry Tax Act, 1999, read with Rule 30(3)(d) of the Odisha Entry Tax Rules, 1999, was validly rejected by the Sales Tax Officer. 2. Whether the Petitioner should be relegated to the alternative remedy of filing a revision petition before the Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, despite the Petitioner's contention that a circular issued by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes rendered such a revision ineffective. Petitioner's Argument: The Petitioner argued that a circular dated January 7, 2017, issued by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Odisha, concerning the processing of refund applications, made filing a revision petition before the Commissioner a futile exercise. Therefore, the writ petition was maintainable. Opposite Parties' Argument: The Opposite Parties contended that the impugned order was not passed in pursuance of the aforementioned circular. They further stated that the revisional authority is the Additional Commissioner, not the Commissioner, and that the Additional Commissioner would consider the revision petition on its merits, irrespective of the circular.