Commercial Taxes Officer, Anti Evasion vs Samradhi Industries

Pratap Krishna Lohra, J.

Petitioner-Revenue has preferred this revision petition under Section 86 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994 (for short, ''Act'') challenging the judgment and order dated 4th of July, 2012 passed by the Rajasthan Tax Board, Ajmer. By the order impugned, learned Tax Board has partly allowed the appeal of the Revenue against the order passed by the first appellate authority.

The learned Tax Board, while rendering the impugned judgment, has held that in view of rescinding of notification dated 12th of July, 2004 without any saving clause, now the provisions contained therein cannot be pressed into service vis-�-vis the assessee. While passing the impugned judgment and order, the learned Tax Board has also placed reliance on some of its earlier decisions by the Co-ordinate Benches.

At the threshold, when the matter came up before this Court on 06.12.2013, the Court was pleased to make following order:--

"The Tax Board has decided the appeal relying on its earlier orders, which have been noticed at page 4 of the impugned judgment.

Learned counsel for the petitioner prays for time to find out the status as to whether the said judgments were questioned by the Department and, if so, the result thereof. Time prayed for is allowed.

List after three weeks."

Pursuant to the order dated 06.12.2013, learned counsel, Mr. Buchh, has informed the Court that against the earlier verdicts of the Tax Board, referred to in para 6 of the impugned judgment, Revenue has not preferred revision petitions and those judgments have attained finality.

The petitioner may be a department, which is responsible for generating/collecting Revenue for the State, is expected to maintain consistency in the judicial verdicts. As, in these earlier judgments, the Revenue has not made any endeavour to assail these verdicts by way of revision petition, it is not in fitness of things to examine the issue involved in this revision petition on merits. However, after examining the impugned order on merits also, at the instance of the learned counsel for the Revenue, I am afraid no question of law is involved in the matter requiring adjudication in exercise of revisional jurisdiction.

Consequently, revision petition fails and same is, accordingly, dismissed.