Satya Rani vs. Punjab State Elec.Baord Andd O - Punjab and Haryana High Court, 31 May 2024

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

RSA-3429 o IN TH Satya Rani Punjab Stat CORAM: H Argued by: NAMIT KU 1. judgment an Civil Judge filed by the judgment an Additional appellant ag the same fat 2. made as pe declaration Sub Divisio on 15.01.19 widow of sa of 1998 HE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA AT CHANDIGAR RSA-3429 o Reserved on Pronounced (deceased) through LRs Versus e Electricity Board (now PSPCL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAM - Mr. Surinder Garg, Advocate, Ms. Simurita Singh, Advocate, UMAR, J. This Regular Second Appea nd decree dated 17.05.1996, pas e (Junior Division), Faridkot, w e appellant-plaintiff was dismis nd decree dated 09.09.1998, pas District Judge, Faridkot, where gainst the judgment and decree te. For convenience sake, referen er their status in the civil suit pleading therein that Prince Ku on, Punjab State Electricity Boar 992 during his employment at B aid Prince Kumar was granted th 1 AB AND HARYANA RH of 1998 n: 22.05.2024 d on: 31.05.2024 ......Appellant(s) L) and others ......Respondents MIT KUMAR for the appellant. , for the respondents. al is directed against the ssed by the Court of learned whereby suit for declaration ssed as well as against the ssed by the Court of learned eby appeal preferred by the e dated 17.05.1996 also met nce to the parties is being t. Plaintiff filed a suit for umar was posted as JE II at d, Baghapurana, and he died Baghapurana. Plaintiff being he benefit of family pension RAVINDER SINGH 2024.05.31 16:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-3429 o vide order d that plainti amount of rhyme and the plaintiff that plaintif by the defen leave arrear 3. written stat and his dea Rs.58,202/- amount was remaining a 4. the plaint a statement. 5. framed. of 1998 dated 03.02.1993 by the defenda ff was released the gratuity o Rs.58,202/- was deducted by t reasons and remaining amount f, which she received under pro ff is entitled to get amount of Rs ndants. She was also entitled to rs, which had been withheld by th Upon notice, defendants app ement admitting the employmen ath. However, it was averred - in the stock of deceased Prince s adjusted towards his amount amount of Rs.16,048/- was paid t Plaintiff filed replication reiter and denying those taken by the On the pleadings of the part 1. Whether order dated 11 of recovery of Rs.58,20 on the grounds mentione 2. Whether the plaintiff is prayed for? OPP 3. Whether plaintiff is injunction? OPP 4. Whether amount was ad of gratuity under the ru has been paid by the plai 2 ants. It was further pleaded f Rs.74,250/-, however, an the defendants without any of Rs.16,048/- was paid to otest. It was further pleaded s.58,202/-, illegally deducted bonus, arrears of salary and he defendants illegally. peared and filed their joint nt of Prince Kumar as JE II that there was shortage of Kumar and as such the said of gratuity under Rules and to the plaintiff. rating the assertions made in e defendants in the written ties, following issues were .10.1993 of defendant No.3 02/- is illegal, null and void ed in the plaint? OPP s entitled to declaration as entitled to mandatory djusted towards the amount ules and remaining amount intiff as alleged? OPD RAVINDER SINGH 2024.05.31 16:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-3429 o 6. on record, t decree dated 7. Court, plain which has b 8. and decree therefore, a below have amount of g further con September, year 1993. ever issued during his l null and voi support of judgment o Chand v. D 1694. 9. supported contended of 1998 5. Relief. After hearing arguments and trial Court dismissed the suit of d 17.05.1996. Aggrieved against the judgm ntiff preferred an appeal before been dismissed vide judgment an Learned counsel for the appe passed by the Courts below are not sustainable in the eyes e failed to appreciate that no reco gratuity to be paid to the LRs of ntended that alleged shortage p 1981 to October, 1984 and rec He further contended that no d to the deceased Prince Kuma life-time, therefore, order of reco id and the Courts below ought to his contentions, learned counse of a Co-ordinate Bench of this Director General of Police, CR On the other hand, learned c the judgments and decrees o that same are legal and va 3 after appreciating evidence f plaintiff vide judgment and ment and decree of the trial e the lower appellate Court, nd decree dated 09.09.1998. ellant contended judgments are against law and facts, of law as both the Courts overy can be made from the the deceased employee. He pertains to the period from covery has been made in the notice or charge-sheet was ar for the alleged shortage overy dated 11.10.1993 was o have set aside the same. In el placed reliance upon the s Court in Ex Naik Bhag RPF and others, 2024 LIC counsel for the respondents of the Courts below and alid. She contended that RAVINDER SINGH 2024.05.31 16:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-3429 o respondents amount from the electrica himself and 10. the record. 11. 12. relying upo Punjab v. R held that n deceased em under: - of 1998 s-defendants were well within m the deceased’s gratuity as the al measurement book which was d he owed the amount to the resp I have heard learned counsel The present appeal was admitte This Court in Naik Bhag C on the judgment of the Hon’ble Rafiq Masih (White Washer) no recovery can be effected fr mployee. Relevant portion from “7. Supreme Court in State o (White Washer) etc 2015 (4) circumstances where no recov employee despite excess pay

enumerated in the judgment circumstances where the Cour no recovery shall be effected ar “18. It is not possible t hardship which would issue of recovery, where been made by the em entitlement. Be that a decisions referred to h ready reference, summ situations, wherein rec would be impermissible

their rights to deduct the ere was shortage of fund in s maintained by the deceased ondents. for the parties and perused ed on 20.01.1990. Chand’s case (supra) while re reproduced as below : to postulate all situations of govern employees on the e payments have mistakenly mployer, in excess of their as it may, based on the hereinabove, we may, as a marise the following few coveries by the employers, in law: RAVINDER SINGH 2024.05.31 16:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

RSA-3429 of 1998 (i) Recovery belonging service (o service). (ii) Recovery f or the emp within on recovery. (iii) Recovery f the excess a period in the order o (iv) Recovery i has wron discharge has been though he required to post. (v) In any oth arrives a recovery if would be arbitrary t far outweig the employ

Hon’ble Supreme Court in S yer's right to recover.” (emphasis supplied) 2024.05.31 16:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

RSA-3429 of 1998 (2015) 34 GSTR 146 while d Central Excise Act, 1944. The held that in the absence of stat can be effected from legal heir is no provision under Central be effected from legal heirs of relevant extracts of the judg Shabina Abraham’s case (supr "Nothing is certain exc spake Benjamin Frankli 13, 1789 to Jean Baptis a contradiction in terms living to tax the living person is what is left b person's property. This a whether the dead perso his or her estate, can be machinery provisions in question that arises in an assessment proceedin and Salt Act, 1944, can representatives/estate manufacturer after he is are as follows. xxx

xxx

23.

The question that a was whether a dissolved sales tax in respect of i By a two to one (2:1), d the Bombay Act contain to reassess such a diss predissolution turnover referred to the definition Act of 1953 and referred

dealing with recovery under e Supreme Court has clearly tutory provision, no recovery rs of an individual. As there Excise Act, no recovery can of a deceased assessee. The gment of Supreme Court in ra) read as: cept death and taxes". Thus in in his letter of November ste Leroy. To tax the dead is s. Tax laws are made by the g. What survives the dead behind in the form of such appeal raises questions as to n's property, in the form of taxed without the necessary n a tax statute. The precise the present case is whether ng under the Central Excises n continue against the legal of a sole proprietor/ s dead. The facts of the case

xxx arose in the aforesaid case d firm could be reassessed to its pre-dissolution turnover. decision, this court held that ned the necessary provisions olved firm in respect of its r. The majority judgment n of "dealer" in the Bombay d to this court's judgment in RAVINDER SINGH 2024.05.31 16:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

RSA-3429 of 1998 State of Punjab v. Jullu We find that the major relied heavily on the fac dissolve a firm in or assessment of taxes legi which have escaped ass the majority held : "It is plausible th made between the the dissolution of assessees, are no death to evade tax volitional and it is death of an indi assessed to tax sh the statute provi firms it is differe incurs during its sales tax may, wit liability by the vo The dissolution of viewed differently individual and th the advantage of t not want to strike Jullundur case a follow it have like to the death of therefore, procee provisions of the 1 It then wen of the Bombay Sa arrived at this con

undur Vegetables Syndicate. rity judgment of this court t that dishonest persons may rder to escape liability to itimately due from them but sessment. In paragraph 19, hat a distinction ought to be e death of an individual and f a firm. Human beings, as ot generally known to court xes. Death, normally, is not s understandable that on the ividual, his liability to be hould come to an end unless ides to the contrary. With ent, because a firm which existence a liability to pay th a little ingenuity, evade its oluntary act of dissolution. f a firm could, therefore, be ly from the death of an he partners could be denied their own wrong. But we do e this new path because the and the two cases which ened the dissolution of a firm of an individual. Let us, ed to examine the other 1953 Act." nt on to quote section 15(1) ales tax Act, 1953 and then nclusion : RAVINDER SINGH 2024.05.31 16:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

RSA-3429 of 1998 "

22.

Section 15( clause that action the Collector aft assessee under se the prescribed pe given, the Collec assess or reassess the dealer and al 'shall apply accor a notice served u 14(3) speaks of th assess the amoun after giving notic not satisfied that correct and com assess or reasse section 15(1) is th juri iction to ass

14.

By this method personality of the order to enable which has escap answer to a notic partners having assessment canno premium on one having created a s or reassess an Legislature pe juri iction to be dissolution. The a really comes to th evade the sales tax your freedom from 8

(1) contains an important n thereunder can be taken by fter giving a notice to the ction 14(3) of the Act within eriod. Once such a notice is ctor gets the juri iction to s the amount of tax due from ll the provisions of the Act rdingly as if the notice were under' section 14(3). Section he power of the Collector to t of tax due from the dealer e to him, if the Collector is t the returns furnished are mplete. The juri iction to ess which is conferred by hus equated with the original sess the dealer under section d, the continuity of the legal e assessee is maintained in the assessment of turnover ped assessment. It is no ce under section 15 that the dissolved the firm, the ot be reopened. It puts a 's credulity to accept that special juri iction to assess n escaped turnover, the ermitted that salutary e defeated by the device of argument of the appellants his : suppress the turnover, x, dissolve the firm and earn m taxation." RAVINDER SINGH 2024.05.31 16:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

RSA-3429 of 1998 The court then we "

24.

Section 15A analogous power dealer for taxes d 1956 when the S either no assessm period or if an assessment. This contained in se application and m of dissolved firms not assessed prio States or if any escaped assessme Collector to ass notwithstanding This is the neces 15A. It must follo power to rectify a record can be e under section 35 o the dissolution of conditions specif section contains that evident err matter whether th dissolved. Dissolu liability to pay sal It also added in pa "It is indisputable was liable to be business turnover are contained in 1953 and Chapte

ent on to add : A confers on the Collector rs to assess or reassess a due prior to November 21, States were reorganised, if ment was made for the prior ny turnover had escaped s provision, like the one ection 15, is of general makes no exception in favour s. Therefore, if a firm was or to the reorganisation of part of its turnover had ent, it is competent to the sess or reassess the firm its subsequent dissolution. ssary implication of section ow as a corollary that the a mistake apparent from the exercised by the Collector of the Act of 1953 even after f an assessed firm, though on fied in the section. The a compelling implication rors can be corrected no he firm is in existence or is ution is not a panacea for les tax." aragraph 32 : e that the first appellant-firm charged to sales tax on its r. The charging provisions Chapter III of the Act of er II of the Act of 1959. In RAVINDER SINGH 2024.05.31 16:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

RSA-3429 of 1998 this appeal, we machinery provi accordance with cited above, the m be construed so a sections. The co placed on the m 1953 Act will give charging section construction will contained in the resourcefulness a well-timed dissolu allowed to be use of tax evasion. As in Whitney v. Revenue : 'A s workable, and the court should be t crucial omission o end unattainable. crucial omission present case wh unattainable, the we have drawn at that a dissolved f pre-dissolution tur Xxx

27.

The argument that Excises and Salt Act is a must be construed to m by stating that there is under the main charg person, which has been 10

e have to construe the isions of those Acts. In the view taken in the cases machinery sections ought to as to effectuate the charging onstruction which we have machinery provisions of the e meaning and content to the ns, in the sense that our l effectuate the provision e charging sections. The and ingenuity which go into ution of firms ought not to be ed as convenient instruments s observed by Lord Dunedin Commissioners of Inland statute is designed to be e interpretation thereof by a to secure that object, unless or clear direction makes that ' Far from there being any or a clear direction in the hich would make the end various provisions to which ttention leave it in no doubt firm can be assessed on its rnover." xxx

xxx section 11A of the Central a machinery provision which make it workable can be met s no charge to excise duty ging provision of a dead referred to while discussing RAVINDER SINGH 2024.05.31 16:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

RSA-3429 of 1998 section 11A read with earlier in this judgment. Xxx

xxx

29.

The learned counsel Girja Nandini Devi v. B (1967) 1 SCR 93 at par Manjhi v. Management (1994) 1 SCC 292 at p the general principle tha of law by a person doe The context of both decis first decision was in th relation to partition of second was under the Neither judgment has controversy before us.

30.

It remains to consid learned counsel for the Dhiren Gandhi (2012) judgment is correct in interpreting the provisi and Salt Act, legal heir chargeable to duty unde within the ambit of provisions. To the exten what is set out hereinbel "We do not find which foists any s intestate successio no provision whic to recover due fr proceeding again sections 11 and 1 clear, the Legisla

the definition of "assessee"

xxx l for the Revenue also cited Bijendra Narain Choudhury ragraph 15 and Rameshwar t of Sangramgarh Colliery paragraph 12, in support of at an action begun in a court es not cease with his death. sions was very different. The e context of proceedings in f a joint family whereas the e Industrial Disputes Act. any direct bearing on the der a judgment cited by the appellants, namely, CCE v. 281 ELT 64 (Karn). This n its conclusion that while ions of the Central Excises rs who are not the persons er the Act cannot be brought the Act by stretching its nt that this judgment holds low, it is correct : d any provision in the Act such liability in the case of on. In other words, there is ch empowers the authorities rom a deceased assessee by nst his legal heirs. The way 11A are worded, it is amply ature has consciously kept RAVINDER SINGH 2024.05.31 16:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

RSA-3429 of 1998 away the legal liabilities under th

31.

The impugned judgm referred to Ellis C. Rei real ratio contained the that this is a case of noticed during the lifetim goes on to state that representatives of a m excess duty would not by able to claim such ex deceased. Neither of t which refer to any provi the High Court went int moral principle of unlaw apply and since the law needs to be interprete disapprove of the appr flies in the face of first taxing statutes. It is, reiterate the law as i Attorney General [1869] Cairns stated : "If the person s within the letter o however great th the judicial mind the crown seeking bring the subject the subject is free, the spirit of law appear to be. In admissible, in any equitable, constr

heirs from answering to he Act." (at page 69) ment in the present case has id but has not extracted the erein. It then goes on to say short-levy which has been me of the deceased and then t equally, therefore, legal manufacturer who had paid y the self-same reasoning be xcess amount paid by the these reasons are reasons ision of law. Apart from this, to morality and said that the wful enrichment would also will not permit this, the Act ed accordingly. We wholly roach of the High Court. It principle when it comes to , therefore, necessary to it stands. In Partington v. ] LR 4 HL 100 at 122, Lord sought to be taxed comes of the law he must be taxed, he hardship may appear to to be. On the other hand, if g to recover the tax, cannot within the letter of the law, e, however apparently within w the case might otherwise n other words, if there be y statute, what is called an ruction, certainly, such a RAVINDER SINGH 2024.05.31 16:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

RSA-3429 o 13. plaintiff, wa died during Kumar, bein of 1998 construction is n statute where you words of the statu Xxx

34.

We are, therefore, o must be allowed and the of Kerala is, according learned single judge rest

In the case in hand, as co petitioner, the wife of the dece passed away and children bein family pension, thus, state is n any family member of the respondent-UOI has conceded effected from legal heirs of de bank is disputing on the grou had furnished undertaking. furnished by deceased employ and in the absence of any sta create liability of legal heir above-cited judgments has he recovered from legal heirs of there is no statutory provision under the statutory provisions been recognised as constitutio 300-A of Constitution of India. to omission of clause (f) of arti of India, it was considered as f Admittedly, Prince Kumar, as working as JE II with the res g service on 15.01.1992. App ng his legal heir was entitled to 13

not admissible in a taxing u can simply adhere to the te." xxx

xxx of the view that this appeal e judgment of the High Court gly set aside and that of the tored. onfirmed by counsel for the eased employee has already ng major are not entitled to not paying family pension to deceased employee. The d that no recovery can be eceased employee, however, und that deceased employee The undertaking, if any, yee was binding upon him atutory provision, it cannot rs. The Supreme Court in eld that even tax cannot be f a proprietorship concern if n. An employee gets pension s. The right of pension has onal right in terms of Article . It is apt to notice that prior icle 19(1) of the Constitution fundamental right.” husband of the appellant- spondent-department and he pellant – widow of Prince gratuity, family pension etc. RAVINDER SINGH 2024.05.31 16:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

RSA-3429 o However, s deducting R there was s Kumar. Th September notice or c during his conducted from the am settled law deceased em during the 20.04.1999 14. below bein Therefore, t below are s prepared ac 15. accordingly

31.05.

2024 R.S.

of 1998 she was paid an amount of Rs Rs.58,202/- vide order dated 11. shortage of Rs.58,202/- in the he alleged shortage of Rs.58,202/ 1981 to October, 1984. Howev charge-sheet was ever issued lifetime regarding any short and after his death amount of mount of gratuity paid to his w that no recovery can be effected mployee. More so, appellant-S pendency of present appea her legal representatives were br In view of the above, judgmen ng against law are not sustain

the appeal is allowed. Judgmen et aside and suit of the plaintiff ccordingly. Pending application(s), if y.

Whether speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable

s.16,048/- as gratuity after .10.1993 on the ground that account of deceased Prince /- pertains to the period from ver, to the utter surprise, no to deceased Prince Kumar tage nor any enquiry was f Rs.58,202/- was deducted widow, which is against the d from the legal heirs of the atya Rani has since expired al and vide orders dated rought on record. nts and decrees of the Courts nable in the eyes of law. nts and decree of the Courts is decreed. Decree-sheet be any, stand disposed of (NAMIT KUMAR) JUDGE : Yes/No : Yes/No RAVINDER SINGH 2024.05.31 16:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document