Disposed

M/S Bilt Graphic Pap v. State and Ors.

Orissa HC10 May 2023WP(C)/4258/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition challenging the Orissa Entry Tax Act, 1999, the Court observed that the petitioner had already secured relief on broader constitutional grounds via the apex court. The Court disposed of the petition as appealable regarding specific notices and orders.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of; permission given to approach appropriate forum by preferring appeal.

M/S Bilt Graphic Pap Vs State and Ors. — Writ and Judicial Review | Orissa HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) No. 4258 of 2014

¶3

M/s BILT Graphic Paper Products ….. Petitioner Ltd. and another

¶4

Mr. A.N. Das, Adv.

¶5

Vs.

¶6

State of Orissa and others ….. Opposite Parties Mr. Sunil Mishra, SC [CT & GST]

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

DR. JUSTICE B.R. SARANGI

¶9

MR. JUSTICE M.S. RAMAN

¶10

ORDER 10.05.2023

¶11

Order No. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 06. 2. Heard Mr. A.N. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Sunil Mishra, learned Standing Counsel for CT & GST.

¶12

The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following relief:- “(i) Admit and Allow the Writ Petition; and (ii) Hold & declare the Orissa Entry Tax Act, 1999 and the rules framed there under as ultravires and violative of Article 301 of Constitution of India. (iii) Hold & declare the Orissa Entry Tax Act, 1999 and the rules framed there under to be not compensatory, violative of 14,19,21,265,286,300-A, 301,302,303 & 304 as ultravires and violative of Article 301 of the Constitution of India. (iv) issue a writ of Certiorari quashing the impugned notice dated 07.08.2009, the undated audit visit report as at Annexure-2 and impugned Assessment Order dated 18.02.2023 & the undated Demand Notice vide Annexure-3 demanding Entry Tax amounting to of rs.11, 98,218/- along with penalty of Rs.23, 96,436/- being contrary to law, in gross violation of the principles of natural justice and ab initio without jurisdiction. (v) Issue a writ of Mandamus retraining the opposite parties from collecting Entry Tax and any subsequent amount being claimed as Entry Tax in future from the Petitioner on the imported goods brought into the local area in the State of Orissa for consumption, use or sale therein and on goods not manufactured in Orissa for consumption use or sale therein (vi) Direct the Opp. Parties to refund the Entry Tax illegal exacted and collected on imported Goods along with interest @18% till such refund is granted; and (vii) Pending disposal of the Writ Petition stay operation of the impugned order of assessment dated 18.02.2013 and consequent demand notice as at Annexure-3 to the Writ

¶13

Page 1 of 2

¶14

Application; and

¶15

(viii) Pending disposal of the Writ Petition direct that no coercive action be taken against the Petitioner pursuant to the impugned order of assessment dated 18.02.2013 and consequent demand notice as at Annexure -3 to the Writ Application; and

¶16

(ix) Pending disposal of the Writ Petition call for records relating to the impugned order as at Annexure-2 & 3 to the Writ Application to the Writ Application; and

¶17

(x) Issue any appropriate Writs (s)/Order(s)/Direction(s) to prohibit the opposite parties from recovering entry tax from the Petitioner or to take any coercive action against Petitioner.

¶18

(xi) Direct the opposite parties to refund the amount which has been deposited by the Petitioners together with the interest.

¶19

(xii) Direct the opposite parties to pay the Petitioner the cost of this petition.

¶20

(xiii) Pass such other Order(s) as may be deemed fit & proper by this Hon’ble Court in the bonafide interest of Justice.”

¶21

So far as prayer nos.(i) to (iii) and (v) to (xiii) are concerned, the petitioner has already got relief, as the same has already been decided by the apex Court in the case of Jindal Stainless Ltd. v. State of Haryana , 2016 (II) SCALE 1 and subsequent order dated 28^th March 2017 passed in Civil Appeal No.(s) 6474-6798 of 2017 ( State of Orissa v. M/s Reliance Industries Ltd. ). But, so far as prayer no.(iv) is concerned, both the counsel unequivocally stated that the same is appealable.

¶22

In view of the above submission, this writ petition stands disposed of permitting the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum by preferring appeal in accordance with law.

¶23

Ashok

¶24

(M.S. RAMAN) JUDGE

¶25

ASHOK KUMAR Digitally signed by ASHOK KUMAR JAGADEB JAGADEB MOHAPATRA Date: 2023.05.11 MOHAPATRA 12:17:19 +05'30'

¶26

Page 2 of 2

M/S Bilt Graphic Pap v. State and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Bilt Graphic Pap v. State and Ors.

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

Samir Mohapatra andORS Vs State and Ors.

M/S.Bata India Ltd. Vs P.O.Industrial Tribu

Sushil Ku.Patnaik Vs State of Odisha

Shyam Sundar Mishra Vs State

All Orissa Judicial Vs State

Sattar Mohammed Vs Madhusudan Padhy