TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (7) TMI 912
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ropping proceeding initiated for revision of said order suo motu by the Additional Commissioner of Sales Tax in connection with assessment emanating from Section 12(5) of the Odisha Sales Tax Act, 1947 (referred to as "OST Act", for brevity) pertaining to assessment year 1997-98, the petitioner has come up before this Court invoking extraordinary jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India for grant of following relief(s): "In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, it is therefore most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to issue a Rule NISI calling upon the opposite parties to show cause as to why Show Cause Notice No. 229/CT & GST dated 03.02.2026 under Annexure:4 and Show Cause Notice No. 1060/CT & GST dated 07.03.2026 under Annexure:6, both issued by opposite party No.1 under Rule 83 of the Orissa Sales Tax Rules, 1947 seeking to rectify the assessment order dated 04.06.2022 for the assessment year 1997-98, shall not be quashed, and if the opposite parties fail to show cause or show insufficient cause, to make the said Rule absolute by quashing the aforesaid notices under Annexures: 4 and 6; and further be plea....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er dated 27th June, 2019 passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No.17754 of 2014. 3. Mr. Harichandan, learned counsel for the Petitioners, placed before this Court a compilation of several orders relied upon by the Petitioners including the most recent order dated 31st March 2021, passed by the Joint Commissioner, CT & CGST, Bhubaneswar Circle, Bhubaneswar. 4. Without expressing any view in the matter, this Court considers it appropriate to remand these matters to the Assessing Authority (AA) for a fresh assessment proceeding for the tax period in question keeping in view the aforementioned orders of the Supreme Court as well as order of this Court dated 31st March, 2021. All the contentions of the parties are left open to be urged before the AA. 5. In that view of the matter, the impugned order of the Tribunal and the corresponding assessment order of Sales Tax Officer are set aside. The matters shall be placed before the AA on 7th February, 2022 for directions. The AA is requested to pass fresh assessment orders in accordance with law within four months thereafter. Both the parties are directed to cooperate with the AA in this regard. 6. With the abov....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....O. has committed error while interpreting the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited and Others Vrs. Union of India and others reported in 145 STC 91. 3. The Telephone Rental charge collected by BSNL in the Telephone bills is the charge of rent made and received towards telephone sets supplied to subscriber which is coming within the ambit of sale as defined under Section 2(g)(iv) of the OST Act. Hence you are required to explain within fifteen days through personal hearing from the date of receipt of this show cause notice preferably on Dated.17.06.2025 at 11.30 A.M. as to why the nil assessment order dated 04.06.2022 passed by the ld. STO in this case shall not be revised U/s.23 of the OST Act read with Rule 80 of the OST Rules, 1947 to the extent of irregularities detected and reported supra. In case of your failure to furnish explanation on the schedule date and time, the matter will be disposed/settled as per the provisions of statute and relying on the information available in the case record without any further reference to you." 2.5. The petitioner in obedience to such notice, furnished reply by raising objection a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ead with under Rule 80 of the OST Rules, 1947 of the OST Act in connection with nil demand raised U/s.12(5) of the OST Act for the year 2003-04^1. With reference to the subject cited above, I am to intimate you that notice to show cause against revision of assessment order for the year 2003-04 has been issued vide Notice No.781/CT, dt.30.05.2025 & intimation No. 930/CT, Dated 18.06.2025. As per the provisions of law the time limit for suo-motu revision is within 3 years from the date of passing of original assessment order. As the revision order were required to be passed on or before 03.06.2025 but could not passed. In the meanwhile, the Circle Head of Cuttack I West Circle, Cuttack found to have issued notice for the above-mentioned period for rectification under Rule 83 of the OST Rules. In this circumstances as two similar proceedings cannot be taken together, the show cause notice to suo motu revision proceeding initiated by the undersigned is hereby dropped." 3.1. Drawing attention to notice dated 7th March, 2026 (Annexure-6) issued by the Sales Tax Officer, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that after initiation of proceeding for ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng documents, if any, within 7 days from the date of receipt of this notice, failing which action as deemed fit will be taken as per the provision of law." 3.4. It is urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner that serious error of application of law has been perpetrated in initiating various proceedings by the Department. Reiterating the fact that after remand of the matter by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India as well as this Court, the Assessing Authority on factual analysis of the matter, raised NIL demand by expressing his view that the subject-transactions effected by the petitioner would not come within the fold of "Transfer of right to use any goods for any purpose (whether or not for a specified period) for cash, deferred payment or other valuable consideration" as envisaged in Section 2(g)(iv) of the OST Act. In the garb of review of remand-reassessment and substitute his view expressed in the order touching the merit, the Assessing Authority is not empowered under law to initiate proceeding under Rule 83 of the OST Rules. 3.5. To buttress his argument, he relied on Master Construction Co. (P) Ltd. Vrs. State of Orissa and others, reported in (1966) 3 SCR 99, S....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... decision taking into consideration objection, if any, that may be allowed to be filed by the learned counsel. 5. Heard Sri Pranaya Kishore Harichandan, learned representing the petitioner and Sri Sunil Mishra, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the CT & GST Organization on 25th June, 2026. After conclusion of hearing on the said date, this matter is directed to be listed on 2nd July, 2026 (today) for orders. Accordingly, this matter being listed, the order is passed in open Court. 6. Perused the documents annexed with the writ petition. The fact that the Assessing Officer has passed remand-reassessment order dated 4th June, 2022. Indubitably, the Additional Commissioner of Sales Tax, CT & GST Territorial Range, Cuttack-I, Cuttack has dropped the suo motu revision proceeding initiated under Section 23(4) of the OST Act read with Rule 80 of the OST Rules pertaining to the assessment year 1997-98 in connection with the said remand-reassessment order. 6.1. It is discernable from perusal of record that the Sales Tax Officer, Cuttack-I West Circle, Cuttack has issued notice dated 3rd February, 2026 seeking to rectify the remand-reassessment order dated 4th June, 2022 in exe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Heydon, [1584] EWHC Exch J36, it has been held that a Statute cannot be used for a purpose alien to which it has been made, and where a power is given to do a certain thing in a certain way, the thing must be done in that way or not at all and that other methods of performance are necessarily forbidden, vide Taylor Vrs. Taylor, [L.R.] 1 Ch. 426. Even assuming that OP No. 3 has jurisdiction, the same could not have been exercised in the absence of jurisdictional facts, which the subject Rules would take cognizance of. Existence of power is one thing and its exercise is another. Mere existence least justifies the exercise." 6.4. In this respect it would not be inept to say that the petitioner is required to participate in the assessment proceeding and produce materials and documents like books of account, vouchers, invoices, etc. maintained in terms of statutory requirement before the Assessing Authority. However liberty is reserved to the Assessee-petitioner to raise such issues which are available to it under law including the jurisdiction and authority to invoke Rule 83 of the OST Rules on the facts and in the circumstances of the case. 6.5. In this regard the observations o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....case of lack of jurisdiction nor any violation of principles of natural justice is alleged so as to entertain the writ petition at the stage of notice. High Court ought not to have entertained the writ petition, more so, when against the final orders appeal lies to this Court. The judgment of this Court in the case of Union of India & Vrs. Guwahati Carbon Ltd., (2012) 11 SCC 651 relied on by the learned senior counsel for the appellants also supports their case. In the aforesaid judgment, arising out of Central Excise Act, 1944, this Court has held that excise law is a complete code in order to seek redress in excise matters and held that entertaining writ petition is not proper where alternative remedy under statute is available. When there is a serious dispute with regard to classification of service, the respondents ought to have responded to the show cause notices by placing material in support of their stand but at the same time, there is no reason to approach the High Court questioning the very show cause notices. Further, as held by the High Court, it cannot be said that even from the contents of show cause notices there are no factual disputes. Further, the judgment of this....