TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (6) TMI 1428
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ent is engaged in trading of gold, silver and bullion and when assessment proceedings for the year 2014-15 was drawn after providing a due opportunity of hearing, the Assessing Officer has come to the conclusion that respondent has violated the provisions of Section 72 read with Rule 38(1) (2c) and input tax credit is not admissible to him but still he availed the input tax credit (ITC). He further submitted that the assessment order was passed against the respondent which was challenged before the Appellate Authority and same was partially allowed but aggrieved from order of Appellate Authority dated 19.08.2019, the petitioner approached the Tax Board and the respondent has also preferred a cross-objection against order dated 19.08.2019 an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t passed by the Tax Assessing Authority which was earlier affirmed by order dated 17.12.2021 by the Tax Board. He also submitted that this it is a classic example of judicial indiscipline, therefore, the matter be admitted for consideration and till the time impugned judgment passed by the Rajasthan Tax Board be stayed. 4. Aforesaid contentions were opposed by learned counsel for respondent and submitted that sequence of litigation clearly indicate that the S.L.P. was withdrawn by respondent in presence of the Government counsel under the assuarance that the assessment proceedings will be re-opened. He further submitted that on 06.05.2022 an order was passed for re-opening the same but ante-dated order was passed for revoking the sane by D....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... Deorjin Debi AIR 1960 S.C. 941, A.P. Housing Board Vs.Mohd. Sadatullah (2007) 6 SCC 566, Pradeep Mehra Vs. Harijivan J. Jethwa (since deceased Thr. LRS.) & Ors. Civil Appeal No. 6375/2023, St. Teresa's Oil Mills (25 STC 497), Krishna & Co. (124 STC 423), Dev Ji Gokuldas (19 STC 121). 6. Heard learned AAG for petitioner and learned counsel for respondent. Also considered the documents submitted by learned counsel for respondent and perused judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court and Co-ordinate Bench of this High Court and other High Courts as referred hereinabove. 7. The facts of the case clearly indicate that an order of assessment was passed on 03.07.2017 for the year 2014-15 which was challenged before the Appellate Authority by the respo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e details of judgments as cited by learned counsel for respondent. The stress was upon observance of principle of natural justice and following law and consistency. Learned counsel for respondent has further filed certain documents which were part of record of the authorities before filing the instant S.T.R. After initial order of assessment, the matter has traveled upto a Division Bench of this Court and the respondent has not got any favorable order but after order dated 06.05.2022 for re-opening of ex-parte assessment proceedings dated 03.07.2017 which was later withdrawn on same day and a D.B. Civil Writ Petition was filed by respondents which was allowed partially to the extent that liberty is granted to the petitioner to pass appropri....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....b) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case as well as in the law the learned Tax Board was correct in not following and ignoring the order dated 28.01.2022 passed in D.B. Sales Tax Revision Petition No. 01/2022 which is authoritative and binding precedent? (c). Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case as well as in law the learned Tax Board was correct in allowing the Input Tax Credit to the respondent even when the conditions specified in Rule 38 were violated and ignoring that the Input Tax Credit is neither a fundamental nor Constitutional right, but, is a statutory right and available only when the conditions specified in the statute have been complied with? (d). Whether in the facts and circumstances of the law....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....itiated by any violation of Rule 38. 17. The Tax Board has also observed (as mentioned in para No. 16) that Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court wrongly observed the factual matrix of the case that no invoice has been raised/issued by the appellant-petitioner, whereas it has proved case that the appellant has issued all the invoices with mention of 'Cash words therein'. Further, the several observations were also made in the impugned order by the Tax Board. 18. The order dated 28.01.2022 in D.B. STR No. 01/2022 is placed on record as Annexure-4 and it is apparent on the record that after hearing, only assessee (respondent-herein), order was passed by Hon'ble Division Bench and if wrong facts were placed before a Division bench by respondent, then....