Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 1]

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

M/S Surya Construction Company vs A.C.C.T.Bikaner on 15 October, 2013

Author: Arun Bhansali

Bench: Arun Bhansali

                                   1

  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                           AT JODHPUR

                            :ORDER:

    S.B. CIVIL (VAT) REVISION PETITION NO.94/2013

                    M/s. Surya Construction Company
                                   vs.
           Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Bikaner


Date of Order    :: 15.10.2013


                              PRESENT

            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI


Mr. Shafi Mohammed Chouhan, for the petitioner/s.
Mr. D.K. Godara for Mr. V.K. Mathur, for the respondent/s.

                                 ----

BY THE COURT:

Heard learned counsel for the parties on admission. The petitioner is aggrieved against the assessment order dated 11.3.2010, order dated 22.6.2012 by the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals), Commercial Taxes and order dated 22.1.2013 passed by the Rajasthan Tax Board. All the three authorities have concurrently found that the petitioner was required to comply with the conditions of notification dated 11.8.2006, which conditions have admittedly not been complied with by the petitioner-assessee.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner sought to contend that the conditions of the said notification dated 11.8.2006 are contrary to the scheme of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act and Rules, where under the petitioner has availed benefit under Rule 12, which is sought to be taken away 2 retrospectively.

Admittedly, the petitioner has not questioned the validity of the said notification dated 11.8.2006 and all the three authorities have held concurrently against him on facts, merit and on the applicability of the said notification.

In that view of the matter, there is no substance in the revision petition, the same is, therefore, dismissed. The stay application is also dismissed.

(ARUN BHANSALI), J.

rm/