Additional Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes Acted In Undue Haste In Disposing Of Revision Applications: Jharkhand High Court

The Jharkhand High Court has held that the Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes has acted in undue haste in disposing of the revision applications. It is trite law that if an authority acts in undue haste, malice in law is to be presumed, and his action is deemed to be mala fide.

The bench of Justice Rongon Mukhopadhyay and Justice Deepak Roshan has observed that the Additional Commissioner, merely on the strength of a letter written by DCCT, initiated suo motu revision proceedings without even calling for records of the case and without even examining the orders in question.

The petitioner/assessee is in the business of carrying out work contracts in the State of Jharkhand and other states and is duly registered under the provisions of the Jharkhand Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (JVAT Act, 2005).

The Additional Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, despite specific objections being raised regarding the very maintainability of the revision application, only verbally directed the D.C.C.T., West Circle, Ranchi, to communicate the order passed in review proceedings to the respondent.

The assessee/respondent submitted its detailed reply to the suo motu revision application and sought time for detailed arguments in the matter, but on the date itself, judgment was reserved by the Additional Commissioner.

The Additional Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, passed an order in respect of a revision petition filed by D.C.C.T. West Circle, Ranchi. Although only one revision application was filed for Assessment Years 2013-14 and 2014-15, the Additional Commissioner, in its order, numbered the revision application pertaining to the period 2013-14 as Revision Case No. C.C.(S) 301 of 2019.

The Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, in its order, recorded that it has perused the assessment records, and from a perusal of the assessment records, it was of the opinion that assessment orders were prejudicial to the interest of revenue. The Additional Commissioner held that assessment proceedings require further detailed consideration by the Adjudicating Authority. The Additional Commissioner set aside the original assessment orders and remanded the matters back to D.C.C.T., West Circle, Ranchi, for reconsideration of the issues involved and for passing the orders afresh.

The assessee was aggrieved by the order passed by the Additional Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, and preferred statutory revision applications before the Commercial Tax Tribunal, Jharkhand, Ranchi.

The Tribunal allowed the revision applications and consequently set aside the order passed by the Additional Commissioner by restoring the original assessment orders for Assessment Years 2013–14 and 2014–15, respectively.

The department contended that the Tribunal had committed grave error in setting aside the order passed by the Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, as the order was merely a remand order remanding the matters back to the adjudicating authority for re-assessment. Even if, for the sake of argument, it is presumed that the Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes lacks jurisdiction and power to entertain the revision application, the Tribunal ought to have remanded the matter back to the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes in the interest of state revenue. However, the Tribunal has not remanded the matters back and has given its seal of finality to the original assessment orders, which is clearly prejudicial to the interest of revenue.

The assessee contended that the orders passed by the learned tribunal are reasoned and speaking orders after due examination of the relevant records of the case and statutory provisions as contained under the JVAT Act and Rules. It is not liable to be interfered with by the Court in exercising the powers of judicial review.

The court held that orders passed by the Additional Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, suffer from various illegalities and infirmities, and they have been rightly set aside by the Commercial Taxes Tribunal, Ranchi.

Case Title: State of Jharkhand Versus M/s. Ram Kripal Singh Construction Pvt. Ltd.

LL Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Jha) 17

Case No.: W.P. (T) No. 3229 of 2020 with W.P.(T) No. 3246 of 2020

Click Here To Read The Order