Allowed

State of Haryana v. M/S Ar Plastic & Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC26 Sept 2013VATAP/176/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Punjab and Haryana High Court allowed the State of Haryana's appeal. The court set aside the Haryana Tax Tribunal's order exempting the assessee from tax liability on HDPE Fabric, pending a challenge to the earlier original order.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 20.03.2012 set aside; liberty to challenge original order dated 21.02.2012; recovery restrained for one week.

State of Haryana Vs M/S Ar Plastic & Anr. — Punjab & Haryana HC (2013) — LawSathi Research

¶1

VAT Appeal No.176 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

-1-

¶3

C.M.Nos.10840-41 of 2013 and VAT Appeal No.176 of 2012 Date of Order: 26.09.2013

¶4

State of Haryana

¶5

Versus

¶6

M/s A.R.Plastic, Gurgaon Road, Jhajjar and others.

¶7

..Respondents

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DR. BHARAT BHUSHAN PARSOON

¶9

Present: Mr. Gagandeep Wasu, Addl. A.G.,Haryana for the appellant.

¶10

Mr. Akshay Bhan, Advocate, for respondent no.1.

¶11

RAJIVE BHALLA, J (Oral)

¶12

The revenue challenges order dated 20.03.2012 (Annexure A- 3), passed by the Haryana Tax Tribunal, Chandigarh, accepting a review application filed by the assessee, affirming its opinion with respect to exigibility of “HDPE Fabric” to tax @ 4% but holding that as the assessee did not collect tax from its consumers in view of the earlier entry in the Haryana General Sales Tax Act and certain other decisions, the assessee is not liable to pay tax, prior to clarification dated 10.12.2009, issued by the Financial Commissioner and Principal Secretary to Government of Haryana, Excise and Taxation Department.

¶13

We have heard arguments in detail and are of the prima-facie opinion that the impugned order is not sustainable, in law.

¶14

Faced with this situation, counsel for the assessee states, on instructions, that he has no objection, if the appeal is allowed, the impugned order dated 20.03.2012, passed by the Haryana Tax Tribunal,

¶15

Kumar Naresh N 2013.10.03 14:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

¶16

-2-

¶17

VAT Appeal No.176 of 2012

¶18

Chandigarh, is set aside but with liberty to the assessee to file an appeal, challenging original order, dated 21.02.2012.

¶19

Counsel for the State of Haryana states that he has no objection to the statement made by counsel for the assessee.

¶20

In view of the statements made by counsel for the parties, the appeal is allowed, order dated 20.03.2012, passed by the Haryana Tax Tribunal, Chandigarh, is set aside, with liberty to the assessee to file an appeal challenging order dated 21.02.2012

¶21

The appellant is restrained for a period of one week from affecting recovery.

¶22

(RAJIVE BHALLA) JUDGE

¶23

September 26, 2013 nt

¶24

(DR. BHARAT BHUSHAN PARSOON) JUDGE

¶25

Kumar Naresh N 2013.10.03 14:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

State of Haryana v. M/S Ar Plastic & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State of Haryana v. M/S Ar Plastic & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Longowalia Poultry Farm Vs Depty Commissioner of Income T

M/S Balaji Cotton Ginner Ellenabad Sirsa Vs State of Haryana etc.

M/S Satya Narayan Ram Chander Dabwali Vs State of Haryana etc.

State of Haryana Thro Excise & Tax. Officer Cum Assessing Authority Vs M/S Suraj Plastic Industries and Ors.

State of Haryana Thro Ex. & Tax Officer Panipat Vs M/S Shree Tirupati Industries, Panipat

State of Hry Thro Ex. & Tax. Officer Panipat Vs M/S Shree Tirupati Industries Panipat