Remanded

M/S Steel Authority of India Limited v. Commissioner of Commercial Tax

Chhattisgarh HC2 Aug 2023TAXC/91/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Chhattisgarh disposed of a reference petition. The court noted an earlier judgment preventing the reopening of past assessments based on a notification regarding market value determination. Consequently, the Court was satisfied that a reference to the Tribunal was required under the Value Added Tax Act.

What did the court decide?

Directing the Tribunal to refer the question of law involved to the High Court.

M/S Steel Authority of India Limited Vs Commissioner of Commercial Tax — Chhattisgarh HC (2023) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

TAXC No. 91 of 2022

¶5

 M/s Steel Authority of India Limited, Bhilai Steel Plant, Bhilai (C.G.).

¶6

---- Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

 Commissioner of Commercial Tax, Raipur (C.G.).

¶9

---- Respondent

¶10

For Applicant : Mr. Ravi Raghvan, Advocate and Mr. P.R. Patankar, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Mr. Vikram Sharma, Dy. G.A.

¶11

Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri, J. & Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal, J. Order on Board

¶12

Per Hon’ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri,

¶13

Date – 02/08/2023

¶14

Perused the question of law framed by this Court on 09.01.2023. In this petition, the short question which falls for consideration is as to whether the assessment can be reopened for past assessment year despite the notification dated 01.07.2014 which was issued pursuant to the power conferred under Section 2(1)(fff) of the Chhattisgarh Sthaniya Kshetra Me Mal Ke Parvesh Par Kar Adhiniyam, 1976 to determine the market value during the period 2013-2014 which gives power to the State to decide the value as may be notified by the State Government.

¶15

Judgment of this Court in State of Chhattisgarh and Others Vs. Ultra Tech Cement Ltd. and Others , passed in Writ Appeal Nos. 697, 699, 702, 703, 708 and 712 of 2018 on 26.11.2018, also lays down that the past assessment cannot be reopened in view of the notification dated 01.07.2014 which would have a prospective operation.

¶16

Since the question of law has already been framed, which shows the issue

¶17

¶18

needs consideration, as such, taking into the submission, in exercise of power under Section 55(3) of Chhattisgarh Value Added Tax, 2005, we are satisfied that the reference is required to be called for. Therefore, the Tribunal is directed to refer the question of law in terms of issue involved.

¶19

Accordingly, the case is disposed of.

¶20

Sd/-

¶21

Sd/-

¶22

(Goutam Bhaduri) (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Judge

¶23

H.L. Sahu

M/S Steel Authority of India Limited v. Commissioner of Commercial Tax

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Steel Authority of India Limited v. Commissioner of Commercial Tax

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohd. Shahid Vs Smt. Farjana Khatoon

Bhojraj Nishad Vs Smt. Pratima Nishad

M/S Sun Direct Tv Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commercial Tax Officer, Circle- v

M/S Steel Authority of India Limited Vs Commissioner of Commercial Tax

M/S Steel Authority of India Limited Vs Commissioner of Commercial Tax

Chandra Mohan Kurre Vs Premlata Kurre