Allowed

M/s City Bricks v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC6 Sept 2016CWJC/13117/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging a VAT demand order for Rs. 2,67,250. The High Court set aside the impugned order and demand notice for failure to prove service via ordinary post, remanding the matter for a fresh proceeding in accordance with statutory law.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 30-06-2015 and Demand Notice dated 30-06-2015 are set aside; matter remanded to Assessing Officer to proceed afresh.

M/s City Bricks Vs The State Of Bihar… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Patna HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13117 of 2016

¶3

=========================================================== M/s City Bricks through its Proprietor, Taqui Ahmad Rahmani, Son of Anisur Rahman, resident of village - Ratanpura, P.S. Maro, District - Darbhanga

¶4

.... .... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary Commercial Taxes Department, Bihar

¶7

The Principal Secretary, Commercial Taxes Department, Government of Bihar, Patna

¶8

The Deputy Commissioner Commercial Taxes, Darbhanga Circle, Darbhanga 4. The Commercial Tax Officer, Darbhanga Circle, Darbhanga

¶9

.... .... Respondent/s

¶10

=========================================================== Appearance :

¶11

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Krishna Chandra, Advocate. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Anurag Saurav, A.C. to S.C. 2

¶12

=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA

¶13

and

¶14

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT

¶15

(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA) Date: 06-09-2016

¶16

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶17

The challenge in the present writ application is to an order dated 30^th of June, 2015 whereby, a sum of Rs. 2,67,250/- was demanded from the petitioner towards the balance amount of Value Added Tax.

¶18

The stand of the petitioner is that such demand was

¶19

raised without serving any notice upon the petitioner, as required under Section 31(1) of the Bihar Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (for short “the Act”) for the Assessment Year 2014-15.

¶20

Patna High Court CWJC No.13117 of 2016 dt.06-09-2016

¶21

2/3

¶22

In the counter affidavit filed, the State relies upon notice dated 19^th of June, 2015 (Annexure-E) issued to the petitioner with date of hearing as 25^th of June, 2015. Said notice is said to be issued to the petitioner under ordinary post.

¶23

To support that the notice has been sent under ordinary post, a photo copy of the Dispatch Register has been attached which shows that Notice Nos. 1676, 1677 and 1678 were addressed to the petitioner and sent under post with Postal Stamp of Rs. 5/- each.

¶24

A perusal of the record shows that the demand notice pursuant to order dated 30^th of June, 2015 was served upon the petitioner vide Registered A.D. Post. If a demand notice can be sent under Registered Post then the question is that why not a notice for framing assessment under Section 31(1) of the Act can be issued under Registered Post.

¶25

We have serious reservation about the manner of serving notice by way of ordinary post when proceedings under Section 31 have adverse consequences upon a person. We find that there is no poof of issuance of notice to the petitioner. Therefore, we find it difficult to return a finding that notice was served upon the petitioner.

¶26

In view thereof, the writ application is allowed, impugned order dated 30^th of June, 2015, the Demand Notice dated

¶27

Patna High Court CWJC No.13117 of 2016 dt.06-09-2016

¶28

3/3

¶29

30^th of June, 2015 are set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Assessing Officer to proceed afresh with the matter in accordance with law. It is made clear that no fresh notice is required to be issued to the petitioner and that petitioner shall present himself before the Assessing Officer concerned on 26^th of September, 2016 at 11:00 A.M. with a reply and relevant documents whereupon the concerned Assessing Officer shall proceed to dispose of the matter in accordance with law.

¶30

(Hemant Gupta, J)

¶31

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J) P.K.P. N.A.F.R.

¶32

M/s City Bricks v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s City Bricks v. The State Of Bihar 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

Renu Kumari and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Krishna Chandra Jha Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Mostt. Visheshwari Devi Vs The Vice Chancellor, Patna University and Ors.

Ganesh Mahaseth Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

The Magadh University and Ors. Vs Dr. Upendra Pprasad Singh and Ors.

The State Of Bihar and Ors. Vs Sunita Kumari and Ors.