Parveen Iron Store vs K.V.S. Sidhu and Another

Surya Kant, J.—A penalty of Rs. 70,000/- u/s 14-B(7)(3)(ii) of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act was imposed upon the petitioner. Aggrieved, he filed an appeal before the Appellate Authority which was allowed vide order dated 8.6.2004 (Annexure P-2). The petitioner, however, was not refunded the amount of penalty which had already been recovered from him. Consequently, he approached this Court by way of CWP No. 20258 of 2004 which was disposed of on 14.3.2005 on the basis of statement made by the second respondent to the effect that "the amount in question shall be paid to the petitioner within ten days from today".

Alleging non-compliance of the afore-stated undertaking, this contempt petition has been filed.

In response to the show cause notice, respondent No. 1 who is also present in person, has filed his reply by way of an affidavit. Along with the said affidavit, he has appended a copy of the `Refund Adjustment Order'' dated 24.3.2005 which is claimed to have been forwarded to the Excise and Taxation Officer, Ward No. 3, Mandi Gobindgarh. A perusal of the Refund Adjustment Order reveals that instead of refunding the amount of Rs. 70,000/- to the petitioner, the same has been adjusted towards the alleged arrears of Rs. 1,85,000/- recoverable from him for the year 2003-04 by the Officer Incharge, ICC, Doomwali.

Questioning the propriety of the aforementioned Refund Adjust Order, learned Counsel for the petitioner vehemently contends that the liability of Rs. 1,85,000/- imposed on him for the year 2003-04 is already subject matter of an appeal filed by him. Mr. Sahni, learned Senior Counsel, appearing for the respondents, however, points out that the said appeal, in all probabilities, has been dismissed for the reason that the petitioner failed to deposit 1/4th of the recoverable amount which is a condition precedent to entertain the appeal on merits.

After hearing learned Counsel for the parties at length and having regard to the fact that the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the penalty of Rs. 1,85,000/- could be entertained and heard on merits by the Appellate Authority had he deposited an amount of about Rs. 50,000/- and since now a sum of Rs. 70,000/- is already deemed to have been paid by him towards the said penalty amount, the petitioner shall be at liberty to move an application within one month from today before the Appellate Authority for hearing the appeal on merits and/or for its restoration, as the case may be. If any such application is moved, the Appellate Authority shall consider and dispose of the same in accordance with law within two months. Further entitlement of the petitioner to seek refund, if any, out of the amount of Rs. 70,000/- which the respondents have adjusted towards his liability arising out of the penalty order passed by the Excise Authorities of Doomwali, shall depend upon the final outcome of the appeal (s), referred to above.

Disposed of.

Rule discharged.