Dismissed

M/S.Sidharth Enterprises v. Govt. of Odisha

Orissa HC1 Sept 2016WP(C)/9493/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court dismissed a writ application challenging an order rejecting a statutory appeal due to non-compliance of pre-deposit. Citing binding precedents, the court held the issue was not res integra. However, it granted liberty to recall the dismissal order if pre-deposit was made within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Writ application dismissed; liberty granted to deposit pre-deposit within four weeks to recall the dismissal order.

Challenge in the present writ application has been made to an order da ted 28.03.2016 under Annexure-1 by which order, statutory appeal filed by the petitioner under the C.S.T. Act came to be rejected by the Joint Commissioner of Sales Tax, Koraput Range, Jey pore for non-compliance of pre-deposit.

Mr. Pati, learned counsel for the petitioner raised various contention s seeking to challenge the aforesaid order and also brought to the notice of the Court various judgments of this court on the issue at hand. The essential contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that filing an appeal is a substantive right and the C.S.T. Act not containing any specific statute requiring pre-deposit though appeal against the said order are to be followed the procedure under the OVAT Act. He asserts that the requirement of pre-d eposit which limits the right of the appellant cannot be read into an appeal under the C.S.T. Act.

Learned Standing Counsel for the Revenue, on the other hand, submits t hat the self same issue has been raised and considered in the case of Suman Agency Vs. Sales T ax Officer and others, 2009(25) VST 414 Orissa as well as in the case of Scan Steel Ltd. Vs. C ommissioner of Sales Tax (passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No.19500 of 2012 which came to be d ismissed by judgment dated 22.11.2012) where the very self same contention raised by the petit ioner was negatived. There are various judgments of our High Court on the self same issue, whi ch we do not need to refer at the present.

The issue raised in this writ application is no more res integra in vi ew of the binding precedents set by the aforesaid judgment as noted hereinabove. Therefore, we have no other alternative other than to direct dismissal of the writ application. This Court orders accordingly.

On the further prayer of the learned counsel for the petitioner, it is directed that if the pre-deposit as demanded by the appellate authority is deposited within a period of four weeks from today along with an application for recall of the order of dismissa l for non-compliance of pre-deposit, the appellate authority would do well to recall its earli er order and hear the matter on its own merits. Free copy of this order be handed over to the learned Standing Counsel for the Revenue for necessary communication. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application. .. I.Ma hanty,J. ........ Biswajit Mohanty,J. 04. 01.09.2016 Misc. Case No.8756 of 2016 In view of the order passed today in W.P.(C) No.9493 of 2016, this Mis c. Case is disposed of. .. I.M ahanty,J. ........ Biswajit Mohanty,J.

M/S.Sidharth Enterprises v. Govt. of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S.Sidharth Enterprises v. Govt. of Odisha

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

Aditya Vs Union of India

M/S.Ipi Steel Vs Union of India

Kalinga Mills Vs O.S.F.C.

Gouranga Ch.Panda Vs State and Ors.

Deepak Swamy Vs a.O.,Axis Bank Ltd.

Bijaya Ku.Rout Vs State of Orissa