AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (5) TMI 128
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... jurisdiction against the applicant under Section 46(4) of the Bihar Finance Act, 1981 read with Section 9(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 was unwarranted and initiated on account of non-discovery of illegalities or improprieties in the assessment from the record of assessment, at the time of assumption of such jurisdiction and initiation of proceeding against the applicant. ii. Whether the notice under Section 46(4) dated 15.2.95, on the applicant, was void in law on account of vagueness and non-allegation of any illegality and impropriety and vitiated on account of prejudgment and bias. iii. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the initiation and conduct of proceeding under Section 46(4) against the applicant was vitiated on account of mala fide and bias from the start to the finish which has rendered the order passed on 16.6.96 modified on the fringe by two revision dt. 3.8.96 and 11.10.96 null and void. iv. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal has erred in holding that sales outside the state by stockyards and branches under T.B.S.S. were inter-state sales from Bihar. v. Whether in the facts and....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nter alia, on the ground that there was neither any power nor any occasion for initiating the same. The SAIL alleged that this was nothing but a fishing enquiry which was not permitted under the provisions and the scheme of the Bihar Finance Act. 9. By order dated 16th February, 1996, however, the revisional authority partly disagreed with SAIL's contention that the transaction constituted only a stock transfer and not an inter-State sale and determined the tax liability at Rs. 99,68,50,917.34. With respect to the CST sales among the strength of Form 'C', however, the matter was remanded to the assessing officer, and therefore, this part of the order is not the subject matter of adjudication before this Court. 10. The SAIL challenged the revisional authority's order dated 16th February, 1996, before the Commercial Taxes Tribunal, Bihar, Patna, by instituting a Revision Case No.D.N.-129/1996. The Tribunal, by its order dated 11th December, 1997, dismissed the revision, primarily relying upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ashok Leyland Limited vs Union of India & Ors., (1997) 9 SCC 10 (hereafter referred to as Ashok Leyland-I). SAIL's plea for impleading the othe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o revisional jurisdiction by the Joint Commissioner could not be sustained. He submitted that the provisions of Section 6(A) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, were amended, and after Section 6(A)(2), sub-section (3) was inserted to provide for re-assessment by the assessing authority or revision in accordance with the provisions of the general sales tax law of the State on certain grounds. He submitted that such an amendment/insertion was not retrospective. 16. Mr. Gadodia submitted that even otherwise, on facts, the documents on record were sufficient to conclude that the transaction in question was only a stock transfer and not an inter-State sale exigible to any taxes. He, however, fairly pointed out that in one of the Forms 'F', the particulars were left blank and, therefore, the legal fiction about conclusivity would not apply to that particular transaction covered by that form. However, he maintained that the other Forms 'F' was complete and therefore, the legal fiction should have operated in its entirety, and the conclusion drawn therefrom was not even permissible to be rebutted except perhaps under a narrow window carved out by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. 17. Mr. As....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....all purposes, they can be reopened on a limited set of grounds, such as fraud, collusion, misrepresentation, etc. 25. The Hon'ble Supreme Court at paragraphs 111, 112 and 113 of the Ashok Leyland-II case made the following observations, which are also quite relevant:- "111. We, therefore, are of the opinion that the observations made by this Court in Ashok Leyland to the effect that an order passed under sub-section (2) of Section 6-A can be the subject-matter of reopening of a proceeding under Section16 of the State Act were not correct. 112. However, we may hasten to add that the same would not mean that even wherein such an order has been obtained by commission of fraud, collusion, misrepresentation or suppression of material facts or giving or furnishing false particulars, the order being vitiated in law would not (sic) come within the purview of the aforementioned principle. 113. An order of assessment is albeit passed under the State Act. But once it is held that the concerned State Act as also the Central Act is not applicable, as a consequence whereof sales tax would be payable under another State Act, it is doubtful as to whether the power to ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cision of the Tribunal in the first instance. 31. One of the main reasons for remanding this matter is that Mr Gadodia argued that the material on record was sufficient to conclude that there was no question of fraud, collusion, misrepresentation, suppression of material facts, or the furnishing of false particulars, and that Mr Ashutosh Anand sought to contend to the contrary. Such issues are best decided by the Tribunal in the first instance, which is the final fact-finding authority. Therefore, we felt that it would not be appropriate for this Court to make a truncated decision on points of law and then remand the matter to the Tribunal to apply that law to the material on record. The Tribunal's comprehensive decision, both on points of law and on facts, given the overruling of Ashok Leyland-I by Ashok Leyland-II, would best serve the interests of justice. 32. Accordingly, we set aside the Tribunal's impugned order to the extent the same was challenged before us, remand the matter to the Tribunal for fresh consideration of Revision Case No. D.N.129/1996 by considering the rival contentions in the context of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ashok Ley....