2013 (6) TMI 295

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s challenged by the petitioner in this Writ Petition is the order of assessment passed by the second respondent in Assessment No.CST.32201/2010-11, dated 5.3.2013, seeking to quash the same as being without jurisdiction, as the said order is contrary to Section 8(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act (for short, 'the CST Act') read with Entries 67-A and 89 of Part-B of the First Schedule and Section 48-A of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act (for short, 'the TNVAT Act') and violative of principles of natural justice and hence, invalid and illegal. 4. The facts in a nut-shell are as follows: (a) The petitioner-Company is a registered dealer in non-ferrous metals and alloys, industrial valves, etc. Non-ferrous metals and alloys are taxable at....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ot exceed 4%. (d) The petitioner reported a total and taxable turnover of Rs.23,87,74,534/- and Rs.21,58,57,011/- respectively in the Returns filed for the year 2010-11. The taxable turnover reported by the petitioner comprised of two items of turnovers, namely (i) turnover covered by 'C' Forms--Rs.20,92,09,507/- @ 2% and (ii) turnover not covered by 'C' Forms--Rs.2,44,874/- @ 12.5%. The second respondent issued a show cause notice, dated 28.1.2013 stating that the petitioner has not filed Declaration Forms for the turnover of Rs.21,58,57,011/- and hence, the turnover was taxable at higher rate of tax. (e) The matter was adjudicated and ultimately, the petitioner submitted Declaration Forms for Rs.17,91,96,504/- and filed documents fo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....mand made by the second respondent by levying tax @ 12.5% instead of 4%, on the ground that the petitioner-dealer itself reported and paid tax at 12.5%, is contrary to law, and therefore, the impugned order has to be set aside. 6. Per contra, the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents submitted that the grounds raised by the petitioner in this Writ Petition, are all matters to be decided only by the appellate authority, who will look into the grievance of the petitioner. Even assuming that there is a demand of higher rate of tax, an appeal against the impugned order, lies before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT)-IV, Chennai, within 30 days from the date of receipt of the impugned order. He further contended that w....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Law is well settled that before filing a Writ Petition, when there is an effective alternative statutory remedy of appeal against the order passed by the original authority and when an appellate authority is created under the statute, the same has to be availed of by any person who is aggrieved by the order of the original authority. It is trite law that if the order passed by the original authority is in violation of the fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution of India; violation of the principles of natural justice; ultra-vires the provisions of the relevant law; grave error in the order and miscarriage of justice, then the question of waiving the appellate remedy will arise and this Court, under Article 226 of the Constituti....