TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2000 (9) TMI 1008
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Jute Modernisation Funds Scheme (the JMFS). The application of the company for this purpose was registered as case No. 190 of 1987. Eventually a rehabilitation scheme was approved on August 23, 1990 under which the Department of Commerce and Industries, Government of West Bengal granted Rs. 257 lakhs as sales tax/raw jute tax loan to be paid with interest by the company within nine years including the initial moratorium of three years from January, 1991; but the money was received by the company by way of a cheque dated March 17, 1994. According to the company, due to the prevailing chaotic situation on the grounds of labour unrest, strikes, suspension of work and the financial constraints, the matters relating to sales tax payment, assessment, appeal and revision could not be attended with requisite diligence. But the assessment under the West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1954 for the four quarters ending March 31, 1982 was completed ex parte. By a combined appellate order covering the said assessment and the assessment for that period under the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941 and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, the respondent No. 3 (Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Cent....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mplementation or where an appeal under section 25 relating to an industrial company is pending. It is, therefore, evident that if the conditions, as enumerated in the section, are fulfilled the State is debarred only from taking any measure for collection of arrear of tax from such an industry. But assessment of sales tax or proceeding of an appeal or revision in respect of such an industry may proceed according to law. Again, there being specific period of limitation for such proceedings, the same must be completed within the prescribed periods of limitation. Thus what the section prohibits is the initiation of a proceeding for realisation of arrear of tax in pursuance of such assessment, appeal or revisional order. In the instant case, it is evident from the order of assessing officer (vide annexure-D to the application) that the final date for examination was fixed on March 23, 1985 and in spite of being given repeated opportunities the company's representative did not produce their books of account for the assessment period, nor did he produce any order, passed in connection with the writ application pending in the High Court of Calcutta, prohibiting such assessment. The assess....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....not entertain the appeal in terms of the proviso to section 12(1). Thus, there is nothing wrong with the appellate order. In the latter part of our judgment we shall examine the sustainability of the company's plea of non-payment of admitted tax on the ground of its financial crunch. 6.. We now advert to the revision application which was filed 512 days after the period of limitation. As for the justification for such delay it is the company's case that the connected papers and the appeal records could not be located so as to file the revision in time. But such explanation fails to evoke any confidence. When the appeal was disposed of on April 26, 1988, the company was already under the present management. Mr. Bose has not even been able to dispute the fact that for preferring a revision application the only additional ground, besides the grounds for preferring the appeal, was that the appellate order should not have rejected the appeal on the ground of non-payment of admitted tax in view of the financial distress the company was in. For this additional ground the company at most required papers relating to reference to the Board and since such reference matter was under progres....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ast resort Mr. Bose submits that even if the company's conduct as an assessee is not found to be satisfactory, the company solicits the mercy of this Tribunal so that the Tribunal is pleased to remand the matter to the appellate authority before whom it can make its submission challenging the assessment order. According to Mr. Bose, the company will be highly prejudiced if the opportunity is not given. He points out that the company has already paid the admitted tax of Rs. 1,29,995 on April 8, 2000 (vide annexure E-1 to the application). In his opinion, this Tribunal, exercising extraordinary jurisdiction, can in an appropriate case set aside, the appellate order and remand the matter for fresh hearing on merit. He refers to the decision of the Calcutta High Court in the case of Kanknarrah Co. Ltd. v. State of West Bengal (1988) 21 STA 416. It is not understood how this decision can come to the applicant's help. In that case the applicant-company did not file return or produce books of account on the plea of lock-out closure. It did not pay even the admitted tax before the disposal of the appeal. The honourable Court, in disapproving the conduct of the applicants, has observed as f....