Patna High Court - Orders
Molson Coors Cobra India Pvt. Ltd. vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 18 December, 2018
Author: Jyoti Saran
Bench: Jyoti Saran, Rajeev Ranjan Prasad
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.22765 of 2018
======================================================
Molson Coors Cobra India Pvt. Ltd.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar & Ors
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Satyabir Bharti, Adv.
Mr. Alok Chandra, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Vikash Kumar, SC 11
Mr. Bishwa Bibhuti Kumar Singh, AC to AG
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN)
2 18-12-2018Heard Mr. Satyabir Bharti, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Vikash Kumar, learned SC 11 for the State.
The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 02.08.2018 passed by respondent no. 3, the Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes in purported exercise of power vested in him under Section 33 of the Bihar Value Added Tax Act (hereinafter referred to 'the Act') read alongside Rule 25 of the Rules framed thereunder. The petitioner also questions the demand notice dated 31.08.2018 issued pursuant to the order of reassessment put to challenge.
Mr. Bharti, learned Counsel appearing for the Patna High Court CWJC No.22765 of 2018(2) dt.18-12-2018 2/3 petitioner, while accepting to the statutory remedy available to the assessee under 'the Act' submits that the jurisdiction exercised by the statutory authority of reassessment is contrary to the procedure prescribed under 'the Act' and the Rules framed thereunder. He submits that a plain reading of the order sheet enclosed in the writ proceeding would show that on audit objection raised by the Comptroller and Auditor General that the proceeding was initiated by the Commercial Tax Officer taken over by the Deputy Commissioner, Commercial Taxes and ultimately the order has been passed by the Joint Commissioner, Commercial Taxes even while stipulation present under the statute, requires the specified authority to pass such order.
The second objection raised by Mr. Bharti is that there are certain prerequisites attached to an exercise under Section 33 of 'the Act' which manner is described in Rule 25 and a recording of satisfaction by the specified authority on the audit objection on its lawfulness is mandatory before he proceeds to reassess the amount but this mandatory exercise has been left undone and neither the notice of reassessment nor initiation of proceeding of reassessment anywhere records a satisfaction on the audit objection so raised.
Mr. Vikash Kumar, learned SC 11 prays for a short Patna High Court CWJC No.22765 of 2018(2) dt.18-12-2018 3/3 accommodation to seek instruction on the issues raised and file counter affidavit.
As prayed, put up this matter on 08.01.2019 "For Orders".
Until further order of this Court, let no coercive measure be taken against the petitioner pursuant to the order of reassessment and the demand notice issued pursuant thereto as impugned in this writ petition.
(Jyoti Saran, J) ( Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) Surendra/-
U