The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of compliance with the pre-deposit condition under Section 26(6A) of the MVAT Act for filing an appeal against an Assessment Order.

JUDGMENT :

M.S. Karnik, J.

Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith by consent of the parties.

2. By this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner is challenging the impugned letter dated 4.6.2018 issued by the Joint Commissioner of Sales Tax. It is further prayed that an appropriate direction be issued to respondent No.5-the Joint Commissioner of Sales Tax (Appeals-V) to accept the petitioner's Appeal against the Assessment Order dated 26.12.2017 without the payment of any further payment of pre-deposit.

3. Brief facts of the case are as under :-

The petitioner is a public limited company engaged in the manufacture and sale of oleo-chemicals and personal care products such as toilet soaps, talcum powder, hand wash etc. The petitioner is duly registered under the provisions of the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002 ('the MVAT Act' for short) and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 ('the CST Act' for short). The petitioner is also registered under the Maharashtra Tax on the Entry of Goods into Local Areas Act, 2002 ('the Entry Tax Act' for short). The respondent Nos.2, 3, 4 and 5 are the officers exercising powers under the provisions of the MVAT Act, CST Act and the Entry Tax Act. The petitioner is involved in the inter-State purchase of natural gas from Dahej, Gujarat. The petitioner procures natural gas from sources located outside the State of Maharashtra. When petitioner is not able to sufficiently procure natural gas outside the State of Maharashtra, the petitioner procures natural gas locally within the State of Maharashtra.

4. In A.Y. 2013-14, the petitioner purchased natural gas from M/s. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited ('BPCL' for short) on an inter-State purchase basis from Gujarat against CForms. The petitioner was itself responsible for the transportation of the purchased natural gas from Gujrat to its unit. It is the case of the petitioner that they have been filing proper returns under the MVAT and the CST Acts and approximately been paying tax to the extent of Rs.19 Crores every year to the State of Maharashtra in the form of MVAT or CST.

5. With effect from 08.01.2003, the earlier Entry Tax Ordinance of 2002 (Mah. Ord. XI of 2002) was repealed and the Entry Tax Act was enacted. As per Section 3 of the said Act, an Entry Tax was levied on the entry of goods into a local area from outside the State of Maharashtra for use or sale or consumption therein. The said Entry Tax was levied only on goods that were specified in the Schedule to the Entry Tax Act. According to the petitioner, there was no residual entry in the Schedule to the Entry Tax Act.

6. It is further case of the petitioner that natural gas was not mentioned in the Schedule as enacted in 2003. The petitioner did not notice that vide Mah. Act No.8 of 2012 dated 25.04.2012 and with effect from 01.05.2012, Entry 16 namely 'Natural Gas' was added into the Schedule of the Entry Tax Act. As per the provisions of Section 6 of the Entry Tax Act read with Section 64 of the MVAT Act, an investigation was carried out by the Officers of the Sales Tax Department in the petitioner's premises from 15.11.2016 to 22.11.2016. During the course of the said investigation, the petitioner was issued show cause notice dated 22.11.2016 alleging that the petitioner has failed to properly discharge Entry Tax and file returns under the provisions of the Entry Tax Act for the Assessment Years 2012-13 and 2013-14 on the purchase of natural gas by the petitioner from BPCL in Gujarat. Further tax demands were made indicating that the petitioner was also liable for the levy of the applicable interest and penalty in relation to the demands in the subsequent years also.

7. The petitioner contested the proposed tax liabilities by way of reply dated 23.12.2016. However, in order to prove its bonafide, the petitioner without prejudice to any of its rights and contentions, undertook to pay Rs.3,64,24,388/- (i.e. Rs.2,32,37,249/- towards tax and Rs.1,31,87,139/