Research › Search › Judgment

Gujarat High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 471 (GUJ)

Crompton Greaves v. State of Gujarat

2015-04-23

M.R.SHAH, S.H.VORA

body2015
JUDGMENT M.R. Shah, J. 1. By way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs; "(A) be pleased to admit and allow the present petition; (B) be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus and/or a writ in the nature of mandamus and/or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, declaring the action of the respondents in demanding the outstanding amount of sales tax due to M/s. Lumino Lamps Ltd., which has been taken over by the petitioner way back in the year 1994 through BIFR after a period of about 15 years as bad, illegal, unjust and improper and against the provisions of law; (C) be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus and/or a writ in the nature of mandamus and/or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, restraining the respondents from demanding and recovering the outstanding dues of M/s. Lumino Lamps Ltd. of the years CY 1986, CY 1987, 1988-89, 1989-90, 1990-01 and 1991-92 from the petitioner, who has taken over the said company in the year 1995 through BIFR; (D) be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari and/or a writ in the nature of certiorari and/or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, quashing and setting aside the order dated 20/09/2012 rejecting the application dated 19/06/2012 made by the petitioner under the Commercial Tax Settlement Scheme i.e. Amnesty Scheme, without assigning proper reasons; OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, be pleased to direct the respondent-authorities to allow the said application dated 19/06/2012 under the said scheme and enabling the petitioner to deposit the tax component thereof and thereby avail remission of interest and penalty portion of the said demand; (E) be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus and/or a writ in the nature of mandamus and/or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents to release the refunds of the petitioner arising out of order dated 15/10/2013 and order dated 26/02/2014 being annexed at Annexure R colly. to this petition which is illegally withheld by the respondents;" 2. to this petition which is illegally withheld by the respondents;" 2. Shri Trivedi, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that as such to put an end to the litigation even the petitioner was ready and willing to avail the benefit under the Amnesty Scheme and/or avail remission, interest and penalty portion of the said demand and as such for the same the petitioner did submit the application dated 19/06/2012 to avail the benefit of the Amnesty Scheme. It is submitted that however, solely on the ground that the total demand is more than Rs. 1 Crore, its application has been rejected. It is vehemently submitted by Shri Trivedi, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner that as such the respondent-appropriate authority has not even bifurcated the tax component, interest and penalty and the total of the demand, which is more than Rs. 1 Crore is including the tax component, interest and penalty. It is submitted that therefore, as such, the tax component would be less than Rs. 1 Crore. It is submitted that the action of the respondent even in not considering or rejecting the application of the petitioner to avail the benefit of the Amnesty Scheme, which at the relevant time was prevailing is absolutely illegal and most arbitrary. 3. Shri Chintan Dave, learned AGP has stated at the bar, under instructions from Shri H.R. Varma, Assistant Commissioner Commercial Tax, Unit -15, Ahmedabad, that the application of the petitioner dated 19/06/2012 for availing the benefit of Amnesty Scheme, which was prevailing at the relevant time, shall be considered on merits. It is submitted that within a period of three months, the petitioner shall be communicated and/or informed the tax component for the relevant years for which the demand is raised. 4. In view of the above, the impugned order passed by the appropriate authority rejecting the application of the petitioner for availing the benefit of the Amnesty Scheme is hereby quashed and set aside. The appropriate authority is hereby directed to consider the application of the petitioner dated 19/06/2012 and is directed to permit the petitioner to avail the benefit under the Amnesty Scheme, which was in force at the relevant time. The appropriate authority is hereby directed to consider the application of the petitioner dated 19/06/2012 and is directed to permit the petitioner to avail the benefit under the Amnesty Scheme, which was in force at the relevant time. The appropriate authority to communicate/inform the petitioner the bifurcation with respect to the demand raised i.e. the tax component, interest and penalty with respect to the relevant assessment years for which the demand is raised. It goes without saying that the aforesaid shall be on the basis of some relevant material with the appropriate authority. Thereafter, on payment of the tax component by the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of such communication, the petitioner shall be entitled to remission of interest and penalty as per the Amnesty Scheme which was prevailing at the relevant time. It goes without saying that till the aforesaid exercise is completed, there shall not be any coercive steps to recover the amount demanded pursuant to the impugned demand raised. In view of the above, the bank attachment ordered by the appropriate authority is hereby ordered to be withdrawn and if the petitioner is entitled to any amount of refund, which might have been withheld, the same shall be paid to the petitioner in accordance with law and on its own merits. 5. With this, the present petition is disposed of.