2024 (10) TMI 1796

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r. S. Mishra, Standing Counsel. ORDER 1. Mr. Rath, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner and submits, the revision be admitted against impugned order dated 16th March, 2018 made by Odisha Sales Tax Tribunal in two second appeals dealt with thereby. He submits, the order was not to knowledge of his client. Upon having information that the appeal had been dealt with, his client appl....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ven in impugned order. He demonstrates that petitioner had paid the balance tax of Rs.8,95,842/- by demand draft no. 605406 dated 31st March, 2018. Petitioner thereafter filing for revision is seeking to abuse the process of Court. Mr. Mishra relies on judgments of the Supreme Court. i) Judgment dated 10th August, 2017 in Civil Appeal no. 10214 of 2017 (M/s. Shoeline v. Commissioner of Se....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ws attention to sub-section(2) in section 98 of Orissa Value Added Tax Act, 2004 to submit, communication of impugned order cannot be called into question on petitioner having acted upon it. He draws attention to extract from the dispatch register showing impugned order dispatched by hand for communication on 20th March, 2018 and a signature acknowledging receipt. On query made he submits, the sig....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cumstances, though the Supreme Court said that appellant had approached belatedly and may not be entitled to refund of service tax already paid but at the same time appellant should not be called upon to pay any interest or penalty levied on a tax, which was not payable at all in law. In that case challenge to the demand had been made by others and appellant was found to have been waiting without ....