Quashed

M/S Gammon India Ltd. v. the State of Assam and Ors.

Gauhati HC5 Apr 2018WP(C)/6059/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court allowed the writ petition, quashing an appellate order passed solely by the Chairman of the Assam Board of Revenue and remanding the matter to a properly constituted Bench under Section 4 of the Assam VAT Act, 2003.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dated 16.9.2010 in Case No.42 STA/10 is quashed and the matter is remanded for fresh decision by a properly constituted Bench.

M/S Gammon India Ltd. Vs the State of Assam and Ors. — Writ and Judicial Review | Gauhati HC (2018)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010189862010

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶4

Case No. : WP(C) 6059/2010

¶5

1:M/S GAMMON INDIA LTD

¶6

GAMMON HOUSE, VEER SAVARKAR MARG, PRABHADEVI, MUMBAI400025, REP. BY ITS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR MR. RAJUL A BHANSALI, RESIDENT OF 401, HERITAGE SHIRLEY RAJAN ROAD, BANDRA WEST, MUMBAI- 400050.

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

1:THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS

¶9

REP. BY THE SECY, TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, FINANCE TAXATION DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GHY.

¶10

2:THE CHAIRMAN ASSAM BOARD OF REVENUE GHY.

¶11

3:THE COMMISSIONER OF TAXES ASSAM KAR BHAWAN DISPUR GHY-6.

¶12

4:THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF TAXES TEZPUR DIST. SONITPUR ASSAM.

¶13

5:ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF TAXES CENTRAL VAT AUDIT CELL KAR BHAWAN DISPUR GHY

¶14

Advocate for the Petitioner : MS.A CHOUDHURY

¶15

Page No.# 2/3

¶16

Advocate for the Respondent :

¶17

BEFORE

¶18

HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. AJIT SINGH HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJIT BHUYAN

¶19

5.4.2018

¶20

(Ajit Singh, C.J.)

¶21

Ms. ML Gope and Ms.N Mech, learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶22

Mr.D Saikia, learned Senior Additional Advocate General, Assam, assisted by Mr.B Gogoi, learned Standing Counsel, Finance for the Respondents.

¶23

The main submission of the petitioner in the present petition is that since the impugned order dated 16.9.2010 has been passed by the Chairman alone of the Assam Board of Revenue ( in short “Board”) acting as Appellate Tribunal under the Assam Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (in short “Act”) and not by a Full Bench as the disputed sum is above Rs.2,00,000/-, the same deserves to be quashed and the matter be remanded for its decision afresh by a properly constituted Bench as mandated under Section 4 of the Act.

¶24

The learned Senior Additional Advocate General, Assam has fairly agreed that Chairman alone could not have decided the matter and, therefore, it should be remanded for decision afresh by a properly constituted Bench.

¶25

We also find that the Chairman alone of the Board acting as Appellate Tribunal could not have decided the matter by the impugned order and the same should have been decided by a Bench as mandated under Section 4 (10) of the Act. We, accordingly, quash the impugned order dated 16.9.2010 passed in Case No.42 STA/10 by the Chairman of the Board and remand the matter for its decision afresh by a properly constituted Bench.

¶26

The petition is allowed to the above extent.

¶27

Sd/Sd/JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE

¶28

Page No.# 3/3

¶29

Comparing Assistant

M/S Gammon India Ltd. v. the State of Assam and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Gammon India Ltd. v. the State of Assam and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Utpal Das Vs the State of Assam

Afzal Hussain Laskar @ Jakir Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Smti Bhabani Kalita Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Smti Gitalee Bora Vs Sri Girindra Kr Bora

M/S Kone Elevator India Private Limited Vs the State of Assam and Ors.

National Institute of Electronics and Information Technology and 3 Ors. Vs Shri Dhrubajyoti Deka