TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (1) TMI 1560
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Mr. B. Gogoi, learned Standing Counsel, Finance Department, Assam, appearing for the respondents. Review Petition No. 88 of 2013 has been filed seeking review of the judgment and order dated January 9, 2013 passed by a Division Bench of this court in W. P. (C) No. 1100 of 2009 whereas in Review Petition No. 89 of 2013, the petitioner is seeking review and/or recall of order dated January 9, 2013 passed in connection with W. P. (C) No. 12 of 2009 (N. E. Packaged Drinking Water Manufacturers' Association v. State of Assam [2013] 58 VST 1 (Gauhati)). It appears from the record that being aggrieved by the order dated September 30, 2008 issued by the Commissioner of Taxes, Assam holding that the transformation of underground raw water int....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ailing the order dated September 30, 2008. By the judgment and order dated January 9, 2013 passed in W. P. (C) No. 12 of 2009 N. E. Packaged Drinking Water Manufacturers' Association v. State of Assam [2013] 58 VST 1 (Gauhati)), the order dated September 30, 2008, issued by the Commissioner of Taxes was upheld by the Division Bench by observing that transforming raw water into packaged drinking water would not amount to manufacture of the same. Since the writ petition W. P. (C) No. 1100 of 2009 preferred by the present review petitioner was also tagged with W. P. (C) No. 12 of 2009, hence, this court had also passed a separate order dated January 9, 2013 N. E. Packaged Drinking Water Manufacturers' Association v. State of Assam [20....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....that failure on the part of the petitioner's counsel to argue on an important issue raised in the writ petition would be a good ground war ranting review of the order dated January 9, 2013 (N. E. Packaged Drinking Water Manufacturers' Association v. State of Assam [2013] 58 VST 1 (Gauhati)). He further submits that if order dated January 9, 2013 dismissing the writ petition being W. P. (C) No. 1100 of 2009 filed by the petitioner is not reviewed/recalled and the writ petition is not heard afresh on the said aspect of the matter as well, than the same would result into serious miscarriage of justice. In support of his argument, Mr. Goswami has relied upon the following decisions: (i) Y. Venkannachowdary v. Special Deputy Collector, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....missions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the records. From a reading of the judgment and order dated January 9, 2013 passed in connection with W. P. (C) 12 of 2009 (N. E. Packaged Drinking Water Manufacturers' Association v. State of Assam [2013] 58 VST 1 (Gauhati)), it is apparent that the said writ petition was preferred by the Association of North East Packaged Drinking Water Manufacturers' Association, whose units were already under operation and the only issue raised by the petitioner therein was pertaining to the validity of the determination made by the Commissioner of Sales Tax by the order dated September 30, 2008. Arguments were advanced by the writ petitioner's counsels on the ba....