TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2007 (8) TMI 683
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nal petition seeking the relief of declaration to declare that sub-section (4) of section 6 of the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax (Settlement of Disputes) Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as "the 2002 Act") is violative of article 14 of the Constitution of India and thereby unconstitutional, arbitrary and ultra vires. The above relief was sought in the following circumstances: The first respondent is a dealer in hides and skins and an assessee in the file of the third petitioner-Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Ambasamudram, Tirunelveli District. For the assessment year 1998-99, the first respondent was assessed to tax on a total and taxable turnover of Rs. 61,96,914 as against the reported total and taxable turnover of Rs. 75,13,485 and Rs. 4,16,67....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....TC 306. amount paid by the assessee exceeds the amount determined under section 6, the excess amount paid shall not be refunded. In those circumstances of the case, the assessee filed an original petition in O.P. No. 994 of 2002(1) before the second respondent-Tamil Nadu Taxation Special Tribunal seeking a declaration that sub-section (4) of section 6 of the 2002 Act is violative of article 14 of the Constitution of India and thereby unconstitutional. The Special Tribunal by its order dated April 30, 2003(1) allowed the original petition by holding that section 6(4) of the 2002 Act is violative of article 14 of the Constitution of India. The correctness of the said order is now put in issue in this writ petition. The Government Pleader ha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... percentum of the tax in dispute and 25 percentum of such 50 percentum of the tax in dispute. Where the dispute relates to any penalty, by making payment at the rate of 15 per cent of the penalty in dispute, and where the dispute relates to any interest, by paying at the rate of 25 per cent of the interest in dispute. The 2002 Act further provides that the assessee could make an application for settlement as aforesaid in respect of any period for which the (1)Reported as Nagalakshmi & Co. v. State of Tamil Nadu in [2003] 132 STC 306 (TNTST). assessment has been made under the relevant Act against which an appeal or revision has been filed on or before February 28, 2002 before any appellate authority or revisional authority and pending befo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o file an application under the 2002 Act within three months from the date of commencement of the Act. There is no compulsion on the part of the assessee even when the appeals and revisions are pending during the relevant period, to opt for settlement of dispute. It is wholly within the choice and pleasure of the assessees. If the assessee thinks it is beneficial for him to resolve the dispute under the 2002 Act, then the assessee would be governed by the provisions of the Act. Having voluntarily and with full knowledge of the features of the method of resolution, opted to be governed by it, the assessee cannot be heard to question the validity of the sub-section. The dispute resolution method under the 2002 Act is hassle-free, in the sense....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... by no less a person than Holmes J., that the Legislature should be allowed some play in the joints, because it has to deal with complex problems which do not admit of solution through any doctrinaire or straight-jacket formula and this is particularly true in the case of legislation dealing with economic matters, where, having regard to the nature of the problems required to be dealt with, greater play in the joints has to be allowed to the Legislature. The court should feel more inclined to give judicial deference to legislative judgment in the field of economic regulation than in other areas where fundamental human rights are involved . . . The court must always remember that 'legislation is directed to practical problems, that the e....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ayable under the regular charging provision for civil works contract, was put in issue on similar ground of the present case, the Supreme Court in the case of State of Kerala v. Builders Association of India reported in [1997] 104 STC 134 has held that the alternate method of payment of tax is only optional. It is not compulsory on the part of the assessee to opt for the alternate method of taxation. It further held that having voluntarily and with the full knowledge of the features of the alternate method of taxation, opted to be governed by it, a contractor cannot be heard to question the validity of the relevant sub-sections or the Rules. The observation made by the Supreme Court in the abovesaid decision would, on all fours, be applicab....