SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Jhk) 1112

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
M.S. RAMACHANDRA RAO, C.J., DEEPAK ROSHAN, J.
M/s Tata Motors Limited, through its Authorized Signatory-cum Deputy General Manager (Finance), Indirect Taxation, namely, Pankaj Kumar Patwari, son of Late Shankar Lal – Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand, through the Secretary, Commercial Taxes Department and ors. – Respondents
W.P.(T) No. 7283 of 2023
Decided On : 12-02-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Sumeet Kumar Gadodia, Advocate, Mrs. Shilpi Sandil Gadodia, Advocate, Ms. Shruti Shekhar, Advocate, Ms. Sanya Kumari, Advocate
For the Respondents: Mr. Ashok Kumar Yadav, Sr. SC-I Mr. Aditya Kumar, AC to Sr. SC-I

The court ruled that under the Settlement Scheme, pre-deposits should not be deducted before applying tax waivers, ensuring fair computation of tax liabilities.

Headnote:

(A) Jharkhand Karadhan Adhiniyamon Ki Bakaya Rashi Ka Samadhan Act, 2022 - The petitioner challenged the dismissal of their appeal under the Settlement Scheme of 2022 regarding disputed tax for the financial year 2001-02. The petitioner contended that the pre-deposit should have been adjusted after applying the waiver under the scheme. (Paras 1-26)

(B) Taxation - The court emphasized that the intent of the Settlement Scheme is to provide a waiver of disputed tax, and the methodology adopted by the assessing officer was erroneous. The court ruled that the pre-deposit should not be deducted before applying the waiver. (Paras 21-26)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner, engaged in manufacturing vehicles, disputed an assessment order for the financial year 2001-02, claiming excess payment due to incorrect application of the Settlement Scheme. (Paras 2-8)

Findings of Court:
The court found that the methodology used by the assessing officer was incorrect and directed the refund of Rs. 1,18,02,056/- along with interest. (Paras 26-27)

Issues: The main issues were whether the pre-deposit should be deducted before applying the waiver under the Settlement Scheme and the correct computation of the settlement amount. (Paras 6-8, 21-22)

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the Settlement Scheme's intent was to provide a waiver of disputed tax, and the pre-deposit should not be deducted before applying the waiver, ensuring fairness in tax liability computation. (Paras 21-26)

Result: The impugned order was set aside, and a writ of mandamus was issued for the refund of Rs. 1,18,02,056/- with interest.

JUDGMENT :

1. The present writ application has been filed praying therein for the following reliefs:-

(i) For issuance of an appropriate writ/order/direction, for quashing/setting aside the order contained in Memo No. 412 dated 24.07.2023 (Annexure-11) passed by Respondent No.2- Additional Commissioner of State Tax (Appeal), Jamshedpur Division, Jamshedpur in Appeal Case No. JR/JKSYA-01/2023-24 for the period 2001-02, wherein the appeal filed by the Petitioner in terms of ‘ Jharkhand Karadhan Adhiniyamon Ki Bakaya Rashi Ka Samadhan Act, 2022 ’ (hereinafter referred to as ‘Settlement Scheme of 2022’ for short), has been dismissed.

(ii) For issuance of further appropriate writ/order/direction, including Writ of Certiorari, for quashing/setting aside the order of settlement dated 3rd May, 2023 (Anneuxre-9) passed by Respondent No.3 under Settlement Scheme of 2022 pertaining to the period 2001-02 to the extent the amount of pre-deposit of Rs. 2.20 crores, being the amount of disputed tax paid by Petitioner has not been allowed to be adjusted against the final settlement amount while issuing settlement order, due to which, Petitioner was compelled to deposit excess payment of Rs. 1,32,03,446/- or alternatively Rs. 1,18,02,056/- as per revised computation filed before the Appellate Authority (Annexure-15).

(iii) For issuance of further appropriate writ/order/ direction, including Writ of Mandamus, directing the Respondents to refund an amount of Rs. 1,32,03,446/- or alternatively, to refund an amount of Rs. 1,18,02,056/- as per revised computation filed before the Appellate Authority (Annexure- 15) being the excess amount realized by them in terms of Settlement Scheme of 2022 by adopting the mechanism of deducting the amount of pre-deposit made by Petitioner against the disputed tax and, thereafter, conferring the benefit of waiver of tax to the Petitioner in a most illegal and arbitrary manner.

(iv) For issuance of further appropriate writ/order/ direction directing the Respondents to make payment of interest @ 18% per annum on the amount of Rs. 1,32,03,446/- or alternatively, interest @ 18% per annum on the amount of Rs. 1,18,02,056/- as per revised computation filed before the Appellate Authority (Annexure-15) from the date of deposit i.e. 28.04.2023, till the date of refund of the said amount.

(v) For issuance of any other appropriate writ(s)/ order(s)/direction(s), as Your Lordships may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

2. Brief facts of the case as evident from the records is that petitioner is engaged in manufacturing and selling of heavy and medium commercial vehicles and its spare and accessories and is also having its unit at Jamshedpur in the District of East Singhbhum, State of Jharkhand.

3. The present writ petition relates to dispute of financial year 2001-02 under Bihar Finance Act, 1981 . For the period in dispute, an assessment order dated 27.03.2006 was passed by assessing officer, wherein as against the admitted tax liability of Rs. 8,17,38,401/- assessment of tax was made for an amount of Rs. 13,63,45,498/- and, thus, disputed tax remained as Rs. 5,46,07,097/-. Against the said order, petitioner after exhausting the remedy of appeal and revision filed writ petition before this Hon’ble Court vide W.P.(T) No. 1620 of 2014. It is an admitted fact that as against the disputed tax liability of Rs. 5,46,07,097/-petitioner deposited on various dates an amount of Rs. 2.20 crores which was primarily deposited by it either towards pre- deposit and/or amounts towards condition of stay passed by various forms.

4. In the meanwhile, State of Jharkhand formulated an Amnesty Scheme namely, ‘‘ Jharkhand Karadhan Adhiniyamon Ki Bakaya Rashi Ka Samadhan Act, 2022 ’ [hereinafter referred to as ‘Amnesty Scheme’] and even Rules for giving effect to the said scheme was also formulated namely, ‘Jharkhand Karadhan Adhiniyamon Ki Bakaya Rashi Ka Samadhan Rules, 2023’ [hereinafter referred to as ‘Rules of2023’].

5. Peti

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top