M/S S K Samanta And Co. Private Limited vs. Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes, Raipur

Facts

The petitioner, M/s S.K. Samanta And Co. Private Limited, is challenging orders dated July 21, 2022, passed by the Commercial Tax Tribunal, Raipur. These orders dismissed three second appeals filed by the petitioner against an order of the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer had imposed VAT Tax amounting to Rs. 4,05,00,955/- for the financial year 2013-14. The petitioner's first appeal before the Appellate Additional Commissioner Commercial Tax was dismissed on December 13, 2019. Subsequently, the petitioner filed three second appeals before the Tribunal. During the pendency of these second appeals, the petitioner filed applications under Section 50 of the Chhattisgarh Value Added Tax Act, 2005, to present additional facts and arguments, which the petitioner contends were not considered by the Tribunal.

Held

The High Court held that the Commercial Tax Tribunal failed to consider the applications filed by the petitioner under Section 50 of the Chhattisgarh Value Added Tax Act, 2005, which were intended to bring forth additional facts and arguments to support the grounds of appeal. The Court found that these applications were not taken into consideration before the Tribunal passed its impugned orders dismissing the second appeals. Consequently, the Court set aside the orders passed by the Tribunal in Appeals No.A/108/283/2020/ET, A/107/283/2020/VAT & A/109/283/2020/CST. The matter was remitted back to the learned Tribunal to decide all the appeals afresh. The Tribunal is directed to consider the applications moved by the petitioner and decide the appeals strictly in accordance with law, after affording due opportunity to both parties. The Court did not comment on the merits of the case.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Commercial Tax Tribunal erred in dismissing the petitioner's second appeals without considering the applications filed under Section 50 of the Chhattisgarh Value Added Tax Act, 2005, for bringing additional facts and arguments? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the applications filed under Section 50 of the Chhattisgarh Value Added Tax Act, 2005, were crucial for supporting the grounds raised in their second appeals. They contended that the Tribunal failed to consider these applications, leading to erroneous dismissal orders. The petitioner also highlighted that the VAT Tax imposed by the Assessing Officer suffered from defects, specifically regarding the consideration of the entire turnover without accounting for the break-up of turnover pertaining to Chhattisgarh, an issue they claim was not addressed by the Tribunal. Respondents' Contention: The respondents argued that the objections raised before the Tribunal were not presented before the First Appellate Authority and were being raised for the first time before the High Court. They further contended that the petition was not maintainable in its current form under Section 55 of the Chhattisgarh Value Added Tax Act, 2005, as the petitioner had an alternative statutory remedy.