Jaiswal Plastic Tubes LTD. vs. Sales Tax Officer CT And GST Circle, Balasore

Held

The Court held that the present writ petition is disposed of in terms of the order passed in W.P.(C) No. 8070 of 2016. The petitioner is granted liberty to file a statutory appeal within a period of four weeks from the date of the order, along with necessary declaration forms in original, before the Appellate Authority. The petitioner is directed to produce a copy of this order before the opposite parties-authorities within two weeks for necessary compliance. The opposite parties-authorities are at liberty to seek a review of this order if there is any discrepancy regarding its applicability to the present case. The original copy of the assessment order is to be returned to the petitioner for the purpose of filing the appeal, to be substituted by an attested photocopy. The ratio decidendi is that when a case is squarely covered by a previous judgment of a coordinate bench, the High Court may dispose of the subsequent writ petition in terms of the earlier order, granting liberty to the petitioner to pursue statutory remedies. No issue was expressly left undecided.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s. Jindal Steel and Power Ltd., filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 25.10.2018 passed by the Sales Tax Officer, CT & GST Circle, Balasore. This order imposed a penalty under a substituted Rule 12(3)(g) of the CST(O) Rules, 1957, for the tax period from 01.04.2013 to 30.06.2017. The petitioner contended that the order was passed in excess of jurisdiction, without jurisdiction, and without any authority of law. The petitioner relied on a previous order of a coordinate bench of the High Court in W.P.(C) No. 8070 of 2016, which dealt with a similar challenge to an assessment order and the imposition of penalty under Rule 12(3) of the CST (Odisha) Rules, 1957.

Key Issues

1. Whether the order dated 25.10.2018 passed by the Sales Tax Officer, CT & GST Circle, Balasore, imposing penalty under a substituted Rule 12(3)(g) of the CST(O) Rules, 1957, for the tax period 01.04.2013 to 30.06.2017, is illegal, improper, passed in excess of jurisdiction, without jurisdiction, and without any authority of law? Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that the present case is squarely covered by the decision of a coordinate bench in M/s. Jindal Steel and Power Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax, Angul Circle & Ors. (W.P.(C) No. 8070 of 2016). Therefore, the writ petition should be disposed of in terms of that order. Revenue's contention: The judgment does not record any specific contention from the Revenue's side. However, the previous order in W.P.(C) No. 8070 of 2016 involved arguments from Mr. R.P. Kar, learned Standing Counsel for the Revenue.