Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
M/S Azad Coach Pvt Ltd vs State Of Raj And Anr on 29 November, 2016
Author: M.N. Bhandari
Bench: M.N. Bhandari
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR
RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B.CIVIL WRITS NO. 16576 / 2016
M/s Azad Coach Pvt Ltd., E-18, RIICO Industrial Area,
Kukas, Jaipur Through Its Director Shri Amarjeet
Singh Chadha Son of Late Shri G.S. Chadha, B-61,
Yash Path, Tilak Nagar, Jaipur, Address:
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State of Rajasthan Through the Principal Secretary,
Finance, Government of Rajasthan,, Address:
Secretariat,Jaipur
2. The Assistant Commissioner, Anti Evasion, Zone-I
Commercial Taxes Rajasthan,, Address: Kar Bhawan,
Jhalana Institutional Area, Jaipur
----Respondents
__________________________________________ For Petitioners : Mr KK Sharma, Sr Advocate with Mr Devendra Kumar and Dinesh Kumar For Respondents : Mr RB Mathur with Mr Nikhil simlote __________________________________________ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.N. BHANDARI Judgment / Order 29/11/2016 By this writ petition, a challenge is made to the order dated 25.10.2016. The order aforesaid was passed on the stay application preferred by the petitioner company on an appeal before the appellate authority, Commercial Taxes.
(2 of 4) [CW-16576/2016] Learned counsel submits that after the order of assessment, an appeal was preferred. It is submitted that entry tax was not leviable on the articles assessed by the respondents and a stay application was also filed, which has been decided by the impugned order. The amount of penalty has been stayed but no interim order has been given on the amount of tax. The appellate authority has not even assigned reasons for giving limited interim order and, at the same time, a further direction is given to make recovery of remaining amount which could not have been given by the appellate authority. Reference of the judgment in the case of "Rajasthan Spinning And Weaving Mills Limited versus Additional Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Jaipur, Rajasthan"1991 Sales Tax Cases Vol.83 page 181, "Choudhary Construction Company versus Deputy Commissioner (Appeals), Commercial Taxes Department & ors", 2002 Sales Tax Cases Vol127 page 47 and "Zerox India Ltd versus Government of AP & ors", (2009)23VST141(AP) has been made.
Taking into consideration the limited issue raised by learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr RB Mathur, Standing Counsel for the department, was (3 of 4) [CW-16576/2016] directed to put in appearance. He submits that if detailed reasons are given while deciding the stay application, inference of bias is drawn thus while passing the interim order, detailed reasons for denial or acceptance of the application are not given. In view of aforesaid, there is no illegality in the order passed by the appellate authority.
I have considered rival submissions of the parties and perused the record.
The only issue is as to whether the appellate authority needs to give reasons while
accepting or denying interim relief claimed by the petitioner. The issue aforesaid has already been decided by this court in the case of Rajasthan Spinning And Weaving Mills Limited (supra) and Choudhary Construction Company (supra). It has been held that while passing the order for interim relief, reasons should be assigned for denying or accepting the relief. A perusal of the order under challenge does not specify reasons for grant of partial interim relief to the petitioner.
In view of above, impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the (4 of 4) [CW-16576/2016] appellate authority for hearing and to decide the stay application afresh within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. It would be expected to pass the order keeping in mind the judgments referred to above. The parties are directed to remain present before the appellate authority for hearing of the stay application on 5.12.2016. Till the application for interim relief is decided, respondents would not make further recovery, however, direction aforesaid would be subject to final out come of the order on the stay application.
With the aforesaid directions/ observations, writ petition is disposed of.
(M.N. BHANDARI)J. bnsharma