Economic Transport Organization Ltd. vs The State of Jharkhand and Others

Dhirubhai Naranbhai Patel, J.

Learned counsel appearing for both the sides submitted that office objections are not maintainable, hence the matter is taken up for hearing.

This petition has been preferred mainly for the reason that against a penalty order passed by the Commercial Taxes Officer, Chouparan, dated 05.12.2014, under Section 72 of Jharkhand Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (herein after to be referred as the Act, 2005), revision application has been preferred by this petitioner before the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes being Revision Application No. CC(S) No. 259 of 2015, wherein an order has been passed on 24.03.2015 directing this petitioner to deposit Rs. 82,000/- into give a bank guarantee of the rest amount, and, on that condition the truck as well as the goods were released and the matter was adjourned on 24.04.2015. Meanwhile, modification application was preferred, because the very same Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Jharkhand, Ranchi, in similarly situated matter passed an order in favour of a Private Party in Revision Case No. CC(S) 125 of 2015, the said order is dated 10.02.2015, which is at annexure-6 to the memo of this writ petition. No sooner did the petitioner came to know about this order at Annexure-6, modification application was preferred that similar treatment may be given to this petitioner, and, the whole order of penalty passed by the Commercial Taxes Officer, Chouparan, dated 05.12.2014, (Annexure-4) may be quashed and set aside. But, the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Jharkhand, Ranchi had rejected the modification application vide order dated 01.05.2015, because the main revision application was already pending before the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Jharkhand, Ranchi, and, therefore, the present writ petition has been preferred challenging the order passed by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Jharkhand, Ranchi, dated 24.03.2015, which is at Annexure-5 as well as the order passed by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Jharkhand, Ranchi dated 01.05.2015 which is at annexure-8 to the memo of this writ petition, mainly for the reasons that the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Jharkhand, Ranchi, cannot discriminate between this petitioner and applicant of the Revision Application No. CC(S) 125 of 2015, namely, M/s. Usha International Ltd., Nagari, Ranchi.

Counsel appearing for the State submitted that as the Revision Application No. CC(S) 259 of 2015, which is already pending before the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Jharkhand, Rancni under Section 80(4) of the Act, 2005, suffice it will be for this Court to give suitable direction to the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes to dispose of the revision application as early as possible and let the amount of Rs. 82,000/- be deposited by this petitioner into give a bank guarantee of the rest amount, because the principle amount of the penalty is more than Rs. 4,00,000/- as per the order passed by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Chouparan dated 05.12.2015 (Annexure-4).

Having heard counsel for both the sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, it appears that the goods, which are in transportation, is power transformer. Consignor-Seller is a Bharat Heavy Electrical Limited (BHEL)-Central Government undertaking, and, the Consignor-Purchaser is Steel Authority of India Limited (SAIL)-Central Government undertaking, thus consignor as well as consignee are the Central Government undertaking, so this petitioner, who is the transporter the goods, namely, Power Transformer, transported from Jhansi (U.P) to Bokaro, (Jharkhand), for which Central Sales Tax, Excise and Insurance charges etc. are to be paid, and, SAIL has already obtained a declaration forum, as prescribed under the Jharkhand Value Aided Taxes, Act, 2005, which is known as Sugam-504-G, and the same was given to BHEL at Jhansi. This declaration was given by BHEL to this petitioner. This document is required during the transit of the goods and is to be produced when the goods are entering into the State of Jharkhand by this petitioner-transporter. Whatever, may be the reason like break down etc. of the truck, but the fact remains that in another truck the goods were loaded and that truck entries into the State of Jharkhand, now disputes start. There was no valid road permit with this petitioner, because the time limit given in a forum Sugam-504-G was over, as submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner, which is yet to be verified in the pending matter before the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Jharkhand, Ranchi. Thereafter, this petitioner obtained a new road permit on 04.12.2014, but, prior to that or 01.12.2014 the truck as well as goods were seized. Show cause notice was given by the Sate of Jharkhand dated 01.12.2014 and reply was given by this petitioner on 04.12.2014, ultimately an order was passed by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes dated 05.12.2014 imposing penalty upon this petitioner under Section 72 of the Act, 2005 (Order is Annexure-4 to this memo of this petition.)

Against the order, petitioner preferred a revision application bearing Revision Application No. CC(S) 259 of 2015 in which an order was passed by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes dated 24.03.2015 directing this petitioner to deposit Rs. 82,000/- and to give bank guarantee of the rest of the amount. The total amount of the penalty is referred in the order passed by the Commercial Taxes Officer (Annexure-4).This amount was not deposited by the petitioner, meanwhile they obtained a copy of the order passed by the very same officer, namely, Commissioner of Commercial Taxes in Usha International Ltd. The said order is annexure-6 to the memo of this petition, and, it is submitted by the petitioner that the matter of this petitioner is similar to that of the Usha International Ltd., and, therefore, modification application was preferred by this petitioner before the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes.

This application has already been dismissed by Commissioner of Commercial Taxes vide order dated 01.05.2015 (Annexure-8).

Thus, it appears that the revision application bearing Revision Application No. CC(S) 259 of 2015 preferred by this petitioner is already pending before the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Ranchi. The goods as well as truck is already with the respondent-State because the amount, as directed by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Ranchi in his order dated 24.03.2015, has not been deposited and this petitioner wants to argue out the revision application without depositing any amount.

Thus, it appears that as Commissioner of Commercial Taxes is hearing the revision application since March, 2015, we direct the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes to dispose of the revision application preferred by the petitioner bearing Revision Application No. CC(S) 259 of 2015 as expeditiously possible and practically preferably within the period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order of this Court. Meanwhile, the order passed by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes dated 24.03.2015 directing the petitioner to deposit Rs. 82,000/- and to give bank guarantee of the rest of the amount is hereby stayed till the decision of the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes in the aforesaid revision application bearing Revision Application No. CC(S) 259 of 2015 preferred by this petitioner, more so when the goods and the truck are both in the custody of the respondents. The goods will be protected and the truck will be kept in working conditions by the respondent-State, any expenditure incurred will be borne by this petitioner. All the issues raised in this petition are kept open and observations made in this order will not come in the way of the petitioner nor come in the way of the respondents. The matter will be decided by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Ranchi in accordance with the Jharkhand Value Added Tax Act, 2005 and the rules made thereunder, and, on the basis of the evidences on record and judicial pronouncement including the order at Annexure-6. Those who are equal should be given equally treatment and those who are unequal they cannot given equal treatment, because much has been argued upon Annexure-6 to this writ petition, which is an order passed by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Jharkhand, Ranchi in the matter of a Revision Case No. CC(S) 125 of 2015 for the period 2014-15(VAT) order dated 10.02.2015, in the case of M/s. Usha International Ltd., Nagri, Ranchi.

This writ petition is disposed of in view of the aforesaid observations.