Orissa High Court
M/S. Supertron Electronics Pvt vs State Of Odisha And Others ..... ... on 12 October, 2023
Bench: B.R. Sarangi, Murahari Sri Raman
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No. 17048 of 2023
M/s. Supertron Electronics Pvt. ..... Petitioner
Ltd. BBSR
Mr. Amit Patnaik, Advocate
Vs.
State of Odisha and others ..... Opposite parties
Mr. Sunil Mishra, SC for Revenue
CORAM:
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE DR. B.R. SARANGI
MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN
ORDER
12.10.2023 Order No. W.P.(C) No. 17048 of 2023 & I.A. No. 7725 of 2023
03. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
2. Heard Mr. Amit Patnaik, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Sunil Mishra, learned Standing Counsel for Revenue.
3. The petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging the order dated 21.09.2022 passed by the Odisha Sales Tax Tribunal, Cuttack in S.A. No. 67 (ET) of 2020 under Annexure-10.
4. Mr. Patnaik, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the order dated 19.01.2018 passed by the Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Bhubaneswar Range, Bhubaneswar under Annexure-3 has not been received by the petitioner, but action has been taken against him pursuant to such order. He further contended that Section 78 of the Odisha Value Added Tax Act, 2004 clearly specifies that any dealer or, as the case may be, the Government if not satisfied with an order passed under sub-section (7) of section 77 may, within sixty days from the date of receipt of such order, prefer an appeal in the prescribed manner to the Tribunal. Therefore, it Page 1 of 2 gives a mandate that 60 days time is to be calculated from the date of receipt of the order. According to him, nothing has been placed before the Tribunal showing that the order has been received by the petitioner and he has not filed the appeal within 60 days. In absence of any material before the Tribunal in respect of the receipt of the order by the petitioner, the impugned order passed by the Tribunal cannot be sustained in the eye of law. In support of his contention, he relied on the decision of this Court in the case of Sinclair Murray and Company (PVT) Ltd. v. State of Orissa, [1970] 26 STC 451 (Orissa), and the decisions of the apex Court in the cases of Raja Harish Chandra Raj Singh v. Deputy Land Acquisition Officer and another, (1962) 1 SCR 676 : AIR 1961 SC 1500 and Sabarmati Gas Limited v. Shah Alloys Limited, (2023) 3 SCC 229.
5. Mr. Sunil Mishra, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Revenue wants to take instruction or file counter affidavit in this matter. Three extra copies of the writ petition be served on him within three days.
6. Call this matter after three weeks.
7. As an interim measure, there shall be stay operation of the order dated 21.09.2022 passed by the Odisha Sales Tax Tribunal, Cuttack in S.A. No. 67 (ET) of 2020 under Annexure-10, till 09.11.2023.
(DR. B.R. SARANGI) ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Arun Signed by: ARUN KUMAR MISHRA Designation: ADR-cum-Addl. Principal Secretary (M.S. RAMAN) Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa JUDGE Date: 13-Oct-2023 16:35:25 Page 2 of 2