TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>High Court Nullifies VAT Tribunal's Pre-Deposit Order for Revision Applications Under VAT Act, Citing Laxmi Dye Chem Case.</h1> <h3>M/s. Tha Vrajlal Tribhovandas, Sole Prop Hitesh Pravinchandra Shelani Versus The State Of Gujarat & Anr.</h3> The HC quashed the VAT Tribunal's orders requiring a pre-deposit for a revision application under Section 75 of the VAT Act, referencing the M/s. Laxmi ... Dismissal of Revision Application for non-compliance of direction of pre-deposit - HELD THAT:- As the issue involved in this petition with regard to whether the VAT Tribunal was justified in directing the petitioner to pre-deposit the outstanding tax amount in the revisional proceedings filed under Section 75 of the VAT Act is already decided by this Court in the case of M/S LAXMI DYE CHEM VERSUS STATE OF GUJARAT [2023 (12) TMI 1353 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT]. This Court, after having considered the provisions of Sections 73, 74 and 75 of the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003, held 'On bare perusal of Section 75 of the GVAT Act, it does not provide for passing any order of pre-deposit as it is provided under Section 73(4) of the GVAT Act. Therefore, the impugned order of the Tribunal dated 21st March 2023 is beyond the scope of Section 75 of the GVAT Act insisting for pre-deposit to entertain the revision applications filed by the petitioner.' The impugned order dated 25th August 2023 passed by the VAT Tribunal is hereby quashed and set aside. Consequential order dated 29th September 2023 passed by the VAT Tribunal for non-compliance of order dated 25th August 2023 is also required to be quashed and set aside and is accordingly quashed and set aside. Petition allowed. Issues:1. Whether the VAT Tribunal was justified in directing the petitioner to pre-deposit the outstanding tax amount in the revisional proceedings filed under Section 75 of the VAT Act.Analysis:The petitioner approached the High Court seeking to quash the orders passed by the Gujarat Value Added Tax Tribunal, which directed the petitioner to pre-deposit a substantial amount and subsequently dismissed the revision application for non-compliance. The petitioner, engaged in trading agricultural commodities, was audited for the period from April 2017 to June 2017, resulting in additional dues. The respondent revised the assessment order, increasing the dues significantly. The petitioner challenged this revision before the VAT Tribunal under Section 75(1)(b) of the VAT Act. The Tribunal directed the petitioner to pre-deposit Rs. 29,00,000, leading to the dismissal of the revision application for non-compliance. The High Court considered the legality of directing pre-deposit in such cases, citing the case of M/s. Laxmi Dye Chem vs. State of Gujarat, where it was held that Section 75 of the VAT Act does not provide for passing any order of pre-deposit. The High Court allowed the present petition, quashing the VAT Tribunal's orders and restoring the revision application to be decided strictly in accordance with the law within three months, without delving into the case's merits.The High Court, after hearing arguments from both parties' advocates, referred to the case of M/s. Laxmi Dye Chem vs. State of Gujarat, which clarified that Section 75 of the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003, does not authorize the imposition of pre-deposit requirements for revision applications. The Court emphasized that any application under Section 75(1)(b) challenging an order not appealable under Sections 73 and 74 of the Act cannot be subject to pre-deposit. Relying on this precedent, the High Court allowed the present petition, setting aside the VAT Tribunal's orders and instructing the Tribunal to reconsider the revision application within three months, strictly adhering to the law.The High Court's judgment addressed the issue of whether the VAT Tribunal had the authority to mandate pre-deposit in revisional proceedings under Section 75 of the VAT Act. Citing the precedent set in M/s. Laxmi Dye Chem case, the Court ruled that Section 75 does not empower the Tribunal to impose pre-deposit requirements for revision applications. Consequently, the High Court allowed the petition, quashed the VAT Tribunal's orders, and directed the Tribunal to review the revision application within three months, emphasizing adherence to legal procedures. The judgment focused on the procedural aspect of pre-deposit requirements in VAT revision applications, ensuring compliance with statutory provisions and upholding the principles established in prior legal precedents.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
