IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No.1991 of 2011 ==================================================== M/s Singhania Re-Rolling Mills Pvt. Ltd., a Company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 having its Registered Office situated at Karmali Chak, P.S.:Didarganj, P.O.:Begampur, Town-Patna City, District Patna through one of its Directors, Sanjay Kumar Singhania, S/o Shri Devi Prasad Singhania, Resident of B-4B, Pusp Vihar, Exhibition Road, P.S.:Gandhi Maidan, District-Patna. .... .... Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary-cum-Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Bihar, Vikash Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna. 2. The Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Appeal), Patna East & West Division, Judges Court Road, Patna. 3. The Dy. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Patna City East Circle, Patna City. 4. The Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Patna City East Circle, Patna City. .... .... Respondents ==================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner: Mr. Gautam Kumar Kejriwal, Advocate For the Respondent: Mr. Lalit Kishor, AAG-1 with Mr. Vikash Kumar, A.C. to AAG-1 ==================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)
3. 17.3.2011. Feeling aggrieved by the common order
dated 11th June 2010 made by the Joint Commissioner of
Commercial Taxes (Appeal), Patna in Appeal Nos. 1/10-
11 and 2/10-11 the petitioner has approached this Court
under Article 226 of the Constitution against the demand
for payment of Value Added Tax raised for the years
2008-09 and 2009-10.
Against the order of assessing authority, the
writ petitioner preferred the above referred Appeal Nos.
1/10-11 and 2/10-11 before the Joint Commissioner of
Commercial Taxes (Appeal). As per the statutory
requirement the writ petitioner was required to pay 25%
of the tax demand as condition precedent. The writ
petitioner failed to pay such amount. Hence, by order
dated 11th June 2010 both the appeals were dismissed. In
other words, the appeals were not entertained at the
threshold without entering into the merits of the appeals.
Since the dismissal of the appeals the petitioner has paid
25% of the tax liability in the month of July 2010. The
statement is not controverted.
In view of the fact that the petitioner has paid
25% of its tax liability under the impugned orders of
assessment the impugned order dated 11th June 2010
made by the Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes
(Appeal), Patna is set aside. The appeals are restored on
the files of the Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes
(Appeal), Patna to be heard and decided afresh.
The writ petition is allowed in the above
The parties will bear their own cost.
(R.M. Doshit, CJ)
(Jyoti Saran, J)