M/S. M And M Stone vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax

Facts

The petitioner, M/s. M and M Stone, filed a review petition challenging an order dated January 2, 2025, passed by a Division Bench of the High Court in Writ Petition No. 18425 of 2024. The original writ petition primarily challenged notifications that extended limitation periods. The High Court had previously upheld these notifications and relegated the petitioners to the remedy of appeal. Another ground raised in the writ petition was that show-cause notices were not issued and the impugned assessment orders were unsigned. During the hearing of the review petition, the parties reached a consensus. The court acknowledged that the issue regarding unsigned assessment orders and the lack of show-cause notices had been finally decided in a batch of cases in Writ Petition No. 21101 of 2024.

Held

The Court held that in view of the consensus reached between the parties and the fact that the issue of unsigned assessment orders and the lack of show-cause notices had been finally decided in Writ Petition No. 21101 of 2024 and batch, the order under review should be modified. The Court set aside the show-cause notice and the impugned unsigned orders. The reasoning was that the parties had agreed to this course of action, and it aligned with the precedent set in the related writ petitions. The Court reserved liberty for the respondents to issue fresh show-cause notices in accordance with the law and proceed further. Other conditions mentioned in the order passed in WP.No.21101 of 2024 and batch were directed to apply mutatis mutandis to this case. The Court found no point in relegating the petitioner to avail the remedy of appeal given the consensus and the prior decision.

Key Issues

1. Whether the order dated January 2, 2025, in Writ Petition No. 18425 of 2024, which upheld notifications extending limitation periods and relegated the petitioner to appeal, requires review in light of subsequent developments. 2. Whether the impugned assessment orders, which were alleged to be unsigned, and the absence of show-cause notices, warrant setting aside, especially in light of a consensus reached by the parties and a prior decision in a related batch of writ petitions. Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner sought a review of the previous order to recall it and be heard on all issues raised in the writ petition. The petitioner argued that the assessment orders were unsigned and show-cause notices were not issued, which should invalidate the proceedings. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, represented by the Special Government Pleader for State Tax and the Deputy Solicitor General of India, agreed with the petitioner on the issue of unsigned orders and the need for fresh notices. They consented to the modification of the previous order based on the consensus reached and the decision in WP No. 21101 of 2024.