2012 (8) TMI 944 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Dismissal of Writ Petition on Tax Certificate Amendment

The High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the amendment of a recognition certificate under U.P. Trade Tax, directing the petitioner to pursue ... Maintainability of writ petition in presence of alternative statutory remedy - Relegation to statutory appellate remedy - Duty of appellate authority to decide appeal expeditiously on merits - Application of Supreme Court directions in State of U.P. v. Vam Organic Chemicals LtdMaintainability of writ petition in presence of alternative statutory remedy - Relegation to statutory appellate remedy - Writ petition dismissed as not maintainable because an efficacious alternative statutory remedy by way of appeal under the U.P. Trade Tax Act read with the Value Added Tax Act 2008 was available. - HELD THAT: - The High Court held that the petitioner, aggrieved by the Deputy Commissioner's amendment of the recognition certificate, was obliged to pursue the statutory appeal route rather than invoke writ jurisdiction. The court observed that the Supreme Court in State of U.P. v. Vam Organic Chemicals Ltd had directed that each case be heard on its own merits and uninfluenced by prior committee decisions or circulars, and in that light the petitioner should be relegated to the appellate forum for determination on merits. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed on the ground of availability of an alternative remedy and the interim order was discharged.Writ petition dismissed on the ground of alternative remedy; interim order discharged.Duty of appellate authority to decide appeal expeditiously on merits - Application of Supreme Court directions in State of U.P. v. Vam Organic Chemicals Ltd - Direction that if an appeal is filed within four weeks it shall be decided expeditiously on merits, having regard to the Supreme Court's directions in Vam Organic Chemicals Ltd. - HELD THAT: - Recognising that an interim order had been in place, the High Court directed that should the petitioner file the statutory appeal within four weeks, the appellate authority must decide the appeal on merits expeditiously. The court linked this procedural direction to the Supreme Court's mandate that assessing authorities and appellate forums consider each case on its own merits without being influenced by earlier committee decisions, circulars, or prior observations.If appeal filed within four weeks, appellate authority to decide it expeditiously on merits in accordance with the Supreme Court's directions.Final Conclusion: The writ petition was dismissed as not maintainable in view of the availability of the statutory appeal; the interim stay was vacated, and the petitioner was given four weeks to prefer an appeal which the appellate authority is directed to decide expeditiously on merits in conformity with the Supreme Court's directions in Vam Organic Chemicals Ltd. Issues involved: Challenge to the amendment of recognition certificate u/s 4-B of the U.P. Trade Tax, maintainability of writ petition vs. alternative remedy of appeal under U.P. Trade Tax Act and Value Added Tax Act 2008.Challenge to the amendment of recognition certificate: The writ petition challenged the order amending the recognition certificate issued to the petitioner u/s 4-B of the U.P. Trade Tax, specifically deleting LDO/HSD fuel from the items eligible for concessional rate purchase since 2.9.2000. The impugned order was passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Commercial Tax, Noida, following directions from the Supreme Court in a previous case.Maintainability of writ petition vs. alternative remedy of appeal: The respondents raised a preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the writ petition, arguing that the petitioner should have pursued the alternative remedy of filing an appeal u/s 9 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act read with Section 55 of the Value Added Tax Act 2008. The Court considered the directions of the Apex Court in a previous case, emphasizing the importance of each case being decided on its own merits, and concluded that the petitioner should avail the statutory remedy of filing an appeal before the appellate authority.Judgment: The High Court dismissed the writ petition on the ground of alternative remedy, directing the petitioner to pursue an appeal before the appellate authority. The interim order staying the consequential effect of the Deputy Commissioner's order was discharged. However, in consideration of the interim order previously passed, the Court directed that if an appeal is filed within four weeks, it should be decided on merits expeditiously.