AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (8) TMI 341
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to binding precedent of the superior officer in the Petitioner's own case for the earlier Assessment Years 2013-14 and 2014-15. 3. The Petitioner is a Private Limited Company, registered under the Companies Act, 1956 and is inter alia engaged in the business of import and trading of precious and non-ferrous metals such as gold, silver, nickel-cobalt, polymers etc. and is registered under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (the "CST Act"). The Petitioner submits that, it has paid MVAT on the sales of gold and silver made by it and hence, the same do not form part of the dispute. It is further submitted that, however, in relation of nickel-cobalt, the Petitioner is conducting its business in the Arshiya Free Trade Warehousing Zone ("Arshiya FTWZ"), located in Panvel, which zone is deemed to be a Special Economic Zone under the Special Economic Zones Act, 2005 ("SEZ Act") and also deemed to be an inland container depot under the Customs Act, 1962 and accordingly a customs station. 4. It is the Petitioner's case that the Petitioner has entered into agreements dated 4th June, 2013, 22nd November, 2013 with M/s. Arshiya Supply Chain Management Pvt. Ltd., ("ASCMPL") wherein ASCMPL has agr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....314 and 2014-15, the Petitioner preferred Appeals to the Joint Commissioner of State Tax (Appeals- V), who is the designated First Appellate Authority under the provisions of the MVAT Act. It is submitted that vide order dated 26th April, 2019 for Assessment Year 2013-14, the First Appellate Authority allowed the Appeal filed by the Petitioner, inter alia holding that sales of nickel-cobalt made by the Petitioner amounted to sales made in the course of import under Section 5(2) of the CST Act, having been executed by a transfer of the document of title before the goods crossed the customs frontiers of India and were not liable to levy of tax under the MVAT Act and the sales were made outside the State of Maharashtra, since goods were located outside the customs frontiers of the State at the time of transfer of the property. It is submitted that, for the Assessment Year 2014-15, a similar order dated 24th May, 2019 was passed by the Appellate Authority. 7. The Petitioner further submits that notices were issued by the Additional Commissioner of State Tax (VAT-2), Bombay, proposing to review the said Appellate Orders dated 26th April, 2019 and 24th May, 2019 under Section 25 of the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ty was bound as a matter of judicial discipline to follow the decision of the higher appellate authority. In support of his case, the learned Senior Counsel has relied upon the decision of this Court in the case of VIACOM 18 Media Pvt. Ltd v/s. State of Maharashtra (2019 (22) GSTL 338 (Bom.)), regarding the judicial discipline requiring orders of higher Appellate Authorities to be followed by subordinate authorities. It is submitted on behalf of the Petitioner that in the facts of the case, the law of binding precedent applies to quasi judicial proceedings and the fact that review proceedings have been initiated against the two Appellate Orders dated 26th April, 2019 and 24th May, 2019 does not detract from their binding nature and therefore, the Impugned Order consisting of the Assessment Order dated 20th March, 2020 and the demand notice for Assessment Year 2015-16 ought to be set aside. He also submits that the Impugned Order is a non-speaking order in as much as it does not consider the submissions of the Petitioner regarding the binding nature of the appellate orders and ought to be set aside on the grounds of violation of natural justice. 10. Per contra, AGP Mr. Dushyant Kum....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... a sale effected within the State of Maharashtra liable for payment of VAT under the MVAT Act and not sale outside the State not liable to payment tax in the State of Maharashtra as per section 8(1) of MVAT Act. 11. The Petitioner in his rejoinder has submitted that these averments are totally irrelevant for the purposes of determining taxability under the MVAT Act and the CST Act. Further, in rejoinder, it has been stated by the Petitioner that the facts and circumstances of Assessment Year 2015-16 are identical to the factual matrix of the Appellate Orders dated 26th April, 2019 and 24th May, 2019 and that the Petitioner has executed and carried out the very same transactions in all the three periods. In support, it is reiterated that the factual matrix in the Impugned Order has been copied verbatim from the Assessment Orders for the Assessment Years 2013-14 and 2014-15. 12. Having heard learned Counsel for the parties, we are afraid that we are unable to agree with the submissions made by Counsel for the Respondents and are inclined to set aside the Impugned Order consisting of the Assessment Order dated 20th March, 2020 and the accompanying notice of demand. 13. It is not in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Tribunal. The High Court has, in our view, rightly criticized this conduct of the Assistant Collector and the harassment to the assessee caused by the failure of these officers to give effect to the orders of authorities higher to them in the appellate hierarchy. It cannot be too vehemently emphasized that it is of utmost importance that, in disposing of the quasi-judicial issues before them, revenue offices are bound by the decisions of the appellate authorities. The order of the Appellate Collector is binding on the Assistant Collectors working within his jurisdiction and the order of the Tribunal is binding upon the Assistant Collectors and the Appellate Collectors who function under the jurisdiction of the Tribunal. The principles of judicial discipline require that the orders of the higher appellate authorities should be followed unreservedly by the subordinate authorities. The mere fact that the order of the appellate authority is not "acceptable" to the department - in its objectionable phrase - and is the subject matter of an appeal can furnish no ground for not following it unless its operation has been suspended by a competent court. If this healthy rule is not followed,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....shtra; and the sale was complete by transfer of documents of title, which happened within the FTWZ, and not by physical delivery of the goods. The Appellate Authority agreed with the assessee that till the goods were within the FTWZ, which was a customs station/ port and not cleared for home consumption or warehousing from the FTWZ, they could not be said to have entered the State; and since the sales took place before such entry, no tax was leviable on such sales under the MVAT Act. The facts of the present case are no different. The goods were sold by transfer of documents of title before they were cleared for home consumption or warehousing. And yet, the Assessing Authority has held the same to be liable to MVAT on the very same grounds, each of which was rejected by the Appellate Authority in the Petitioner-Assessee's own case for Assessment Years 2013-14 and 2014-15. That obviously cannot be . 16. The learned AGP submits that there are some distinguishing features in the present case; the facts of Assessment Year 2015-16 are not exactly similar to Assessment Years 2013-14 and 2014-15. If that is so, though we do not see how, it was for the Assessing Authority to distinguish t....