Court quashes tax orders, orders reconsideration. Ruling emphasizes Supreme Court precedents.

The Court allowed the petitioner's challenge to the orders passed by the Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner and the Sales Tax Tribunal under the Haryana General Sales Tax Act and the Central Sales Tax Act. Relying on Supreme Court precedents, the Court quashed the orders and directed the Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner to reconsider the matter afresh, emphasizing that a later declaration of law by the Supreme Court could warrant reopening final orders.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to orders passed by Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner and Sales Tax Tribunal based on Supreme Court precedent.

Analysis:
The petitioner, engaged in the manufacture and sale of aerated water, challenged orders passed by the Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner and the Sales Tax Tribunal under the Haryana General Sales Tax Act and the Central Sales Tax Act. The petitioner sought to quash the orders and requested a fresh decision in line with a Supreme Court decision in 20th Century Finance Corporation Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra [2000] 119 STC 182.

The Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner, through order P1, held the petitioner liable to pay tax under the State Act, which was affirmed by the Sales Tax Tribunal in order P3. The petitioner argued that based on the Supreme Court precedent, no tax could be levied on the transfer of goods under the State Act. The respondents contended that the orders had attained finality in 1997 and that the petitioner's review application focused on clerical mistakes, not substantive issues.

The Court considered the maintainability of the writ petition in light of the finality of the previous orders. Citing the Supreme Court's decision in U.P. Pollution Control Board v. Kanoria Industrial Ltd., the Court emphasized that a later declaration of law by the Supreme Court could be the basis for reopening final orders. The Court rejected the respondents' objections and applied the ratio of the Supreme Court decisions to the present case, concluding that orders P1 and P3 should be quashed, directing the Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner to reconsider the matter afresh.

In light of the legal principles and precedents discussed, the Court disposed of the writ petition accordingly, allowing the petitioner's challenge to the orders and ordering a fresh decision in line with the Supreme Court judgments.

---