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

2025 Supreme(Ori) 834

ORISSA HIGH COURT : CUTTACK
HARISH TANDON, CJ, MURAHARI SRI RAMAN, J.
M/s. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited – Petitioner
Versus 
Additional Commissioner Of CT And GST - Respondent
W.P.(C) No. 22097 of 2025
Decided On :  04-09-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: M/s. Pranaya Kishore Harichandan, Pragyant Harichandan,
Advocate
For the Respondent: Mr. Sunil Mishra, Standing Counsel (CT & GST Organisation)

The court affirmed that once a delegated authority has exercised revisionary powers under the OST Act, the original authority cannot reinitiate proceedings, ensuring that statutory appeals remain the proper recourse.

Headnote:(A) Odisha Sales Tax Act, 1947 - Section 12(5), 23(4)(a) - Writ petition challenging the revision of assessment and subsequent demand - The Additional Commissioner exercised power under delegated authority to revise assessment, leading to demand exceeding Rs.20 lakhs. Court emphasizes that jurisdictional facts dictate jurisdiction. Alternative remedies must be pursued before the designated appellate authority. (Paras 7, 10.10)

(B) Jurisdiction and Delegation - It is clarified that once a delegated authority (i.e., the Additional Commissioner) has exercised powers, the original authority (i.e., the Commissioner) cannot re-initiate proceedings under the same provisions. (Paras 9.1, 11)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner, a government undertaking, faced a demand due to a revision initiated post-refund claim concerning assessment year 1996-97. An assessment revision initially found in favor of the petitioner was challenged by the Additional Commissioner, who raised a new demand. (Paras 2, 2.2)

Findings of Court:
The court concludes that the Additional Commissioner validly exercised delegated powers and that the petitioner must seek remedies through the process established under the OST Act. (Paras 10.10, 12)

Issues: The central issue addressed was whether the Additional Commissioner possessed the jurisdiction to revise the assessment based on the provisions and prior judicial decisions on jurisdiction and delegation powers. (Paras 5, 10.1)

Ratio Decidendi: The court upheld the view that once an order is examined under the revisional power by a delegatee, it cannot be re-reviewed by the original authority, ensuring the statutory appeal process remains intact. (Paras 9.1, 10.10)

Result: The writ petition was disposed of, directing the petitioner to seek remedies through designated appeal channels under the OST Act.

Table of Content
1. details of the assessment and subsequent revision orders. (Para 1 , 2)
2. arguments presented concerning jurisdiction and alternative remedies. (Para 3 , 4 , 5)
3. discussion on the interpretation of statutory provisions and delegation of powers. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9)
4. clarification on jurisdictional facts and the court's reluctance to delve into merits. (Para 10)
5. conclusion of the writ petition directing to pursue alternative remedies. (Para 11 , 12)

JUDGMENT :

By way of the instant writ petition under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner craves to challenge the following:

a. Demand notice dated 30th June, 2025 (Annexure-3) issued by the Sales Tax Officer, CT& GST Circle, Cuttack-I West, Cuttack;

b. Order dated 31st May, 2025 (Annexure-2) passed in Revision Case No.DCST/CUIW/1/2024-25 by the Additional Commissioner of Sales Tax, CT & GST Territorial Range, Cuttack-I, Cuttack;

c. Show-cause notice dated 18th March, 2025 (Annexure-1) issued by the Additional Commissioner of CT & GST, CT & GST Territorial Range, Cuttack-I, Cuttack under Section 23(4) of the Odisha Sales Tax Act, 1947 (for convenience, “the OST Act”) in connection with the assessment Order dated 4th June, 2022 passed by the Sales Tax Officer, CT & GST Circle, Cuttack-I, Cuttack under Section 12(5) of the OST Act pertaining to the assessment year 1996-97 (1st December, 1996 to 31st March, 1997).

Facts narrated in the writ petition:

2. The Petitioner, Government of India Undertaking, was subjected to assessment pertaining to Assessment Year 1996-97 (1st December, 1996 to 31st March, 1997) under Section 12(5) of the OST Act by the Sales Tax Officer vide order dated 2nd July, 2002. The appeal directed against said assessment order culminated in confirmation and thereafter by order dated 30th September, 2003 said appellate order got affirmed in second appeal by the Odisha Sales Tax Tribunal vide order dated 4th November, 2019. In further proceeding thereafter under Section 24 of the OST Act, this Court, while disposing of the revision petition, being STREV No.19 of 2020, vide Order dated 22nd December, 2021 set aside the order in second appeal; and remitted the matter for fresh assessment.

2.1. Consequent upon such order of remit, the Sales Tax Officer passed fresh assessment order on 4th June, 2022 reducing the demand to ‘nil’, which led to claim of refund of Rs.20 lakhs.

2.2. The Additional Commissioner of CT & GST, Territorial Range, Cuttack-I, Cuttack initiated revision proceeding by issue of show-cause notice on 18th March, 2025 invoking provisions of Section 23(4)(a) of the OST Act contemplating to revise such assessment order leading to claim for refund of tax paid.

2.3. In connection with said show-cause notice, by a detailed Order dated 31st May, 2025 passed in Revision Case No.DCST/CUIW/1/2024-25 by the Additional Commissioner, the assessment order has been revised and in consequence thereof, the Sales Tax Officer, CT & GST Circle, Cuttack-I West, Cuttack raising a demand comprising tax and surcharge besides penalty to the tune of Rs.20,80,000/-, directed the petitioner to deposit.

Hearing:

3. The matter in writ petition came up for hearing on 04.09.2025 under the heading “Fresh Admission”. Serious objection as to entertainment of writ petition has been raised by the Standing Counsel for the CT and GST Organisation.

3.1. Heard Mr. Pranaya Kishore Harichandan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Sunil Mishra, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the CT & GST Organisation on the question of entertainment of writ petition.

Submissions:

4. Mr. Pranaya Kishore Harichandan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner laid much emphasis on the satisfaction of twin conditions as envisaged under Rule 80 of the Odisha Sales Tax Rules, 1947 (for short, “OST Rules) for initiation of proceeding for revision under Section 23(4)(a) of the Odisha Sales Tax Act, 1947 (“OST Act”, for short). He vociferously submitted that

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