HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Sales Tax Revision / Reference No. 1/2024 M/s Ingram Micro India Private Limited ----Petitioner Versus Assistant Commissioner, Anti-Evasion ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Sales Tax Revision / Reference No. 2/2024 M/s Ingram Micro India Private Limited ----Petitioner Versus Assistant Commissioner, Anti Evasion ----Respondent S.B. Sales Tax Revision / Reference No. 3/2024 M/s Ingram Micro India Private Limited ----Petitioner Versus Assistant Commissioner, Anti Evasion ----Respondent S.B. Sales Tax Revision / Reference No. 5/2024 M/s Ingram Micro India Private Limited ----Petitioner Versus Assistant Commissioner, Anti Evasion ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Dinesh Kumar, Adv.

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Abhishek Paliwal, Adv. on behalf of Mr. Dheeraj Tripathi, Adv.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA

Order

24/04/2025 In S.B. Sales Tax Revision/Reference No s . 1/2024 & 3/2024 :-

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The revision petitions are admitted on the following questions of Law:-

“(I) Whether under the facts and circumstances of the present case, the Rajasthan Tax Board, Ajmer was justified in ignoring the fact that the assessment order passed by the respondent Assistant Commissioner under Section 26 of the Rajasthan Value Added Tax Act, 2003 was passed merely on a change of opinion and there was no reason to believe that the petitioner company has avoided or evaded tax or has not paid tax in accordance with law?

(II) Whether the ld. Rajasthan Tax Board was correct in law in unsettling the settled principle that reassessment cannot be initiated solely on the basis of judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court, Hon’ble High Court or any other authority?

(III) Whether the ld. Rajasthan Tax Board was correct in law in holding that the Mobile Phone/Laptop Charger/Adapter/Power Cord/Bag Pack sold by the petitioner along with the composite pack of Mobile Phone/Laptop was taxable @ 14% and not @ 4/5%?”

In S.B. Sales Tax Revision/Reference Nos. 2/2024 & 5/2024:-

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The revision petitions are admitted on the following questions of Law:-

“(I) Whether under the facts and circumstances of the present case, the Rajasthan Tax Board, Ajmer was justified in ignoring the fact that the assessment order passed by the respondent Assistant Commissioner under Section 26 of the Rajasthan Value Added Tax Act, 2003 was passed merely on a change of opinion and there was no reason to believe that the petitioner company has avoided or evaded tax or has not paid tax in accordance with law?

(II) Whether the ld. Rajasthan Tax Board was correct in law in unsettling the settled principle that reassessment cannot be initiated solely on the basis of judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court, Hon’ble High Court or any other authority?

(III) Whether the ld. Rajasthan Tax Board was correct in law in holding that the Mobile Phone/Laptop/Tablet Charger/Adapter/Power Cord/Bag Pack sold by the petitioner along with the composite pack of Mobile Phone/Laptop/Tablet was taxable @ 14% and not @ 4/5%?”

(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J Gourav/90-93 Powerd by TCPDF (w.tcpdf.org)