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

2018 Supreme(Online)(SC) 3476

SUPREME COURT
S. H. Kapadia, Aftab Alam, JJ.
Jaiprakash Associates Limited v. State of Madhya Pradesh and Others
I. A. No. 5 in S. L. P. (C) No.14828 of 2008 | I.A. No.1 in S.L.P. (C) No.10936 of 2008 | I.A. Nos.327-651 in S.L.P.(C) No.14454-14778 / 2008 | I.A. No.1 in S.L.P. (C) No.15090 of 2009 | I.A. No.3 in S.L.P. (C) No.26813 of 2008 | I.A. No.6 in Civil Appeal No.4715 of 2008 | I.A. No.8 in Civil Appeal No.3453 of 2002 | I.A. No.2 in S.L.P. (C) No.15723 of 2009 | I.A. No.3 in S.L.P. (C) No.14949 of 2009



Clear conditions for tax refunds established contingent upon final court outcomes; interim applications disposed with specified guidelines for taxpayers.

Headnote:This judgment deals with interim applications filed in various special leave petitions concerning the imposition of entry tax. The Court clarifies the conditions under which refunds with interest are to be made if the State loses. Significant determinations include a stay on the impugned judgment concerning tax jurisdiction, and conditions for taxpayers amidst proceedings. Issues framed involve taxation authority, with the Court emphasizing constitutional considerations in relation to tax assessments and guidelines for assessing officers for compliance. The final result confirms the interlocutory applications to be disposed of with clear judicial orders.

Table of Content
1. modification and clarification of refund orders (Para 1 , 2)
2. stay on tax imposition pending final hearings (Para 3 , 4 , 5)
3. timelines for filing returns and applications (Para 6 , 7)
4. constitutionality and taxpayer compliance directives (Para 8)
5. disposal of interlocutory applications (Para 9 , 10 , 11)

1. I. A. No. 5 in S. L. P. (C) No.14828 of 2008:
The interlocutory application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (i), which reads as under: modify the Order dated 15.09.2008 passed by this Hon'ble Court in SLP (C) No.14828/2008 and other batch of petitions to the extent of deleting the words 'the Department / State Government undertakes to refund the taxes paid from today with interest, the rate whereof will be fixed by this Court at the time of final hearing and disposal of the Special Leave Petitions'.

2. The above order dated 15th September, 2008, is re - called, subject to clarification that in case the State of Madhya Pradesh loses at the final hearing, it shall refund the amount(s) deposited with interest at the rate which may be fixed by this Court at the time of final hearing of the matter.

3. I.A. No.1 in S.L.P. (C) No.10936 of 2008:
De - link the special leave petition from S.L.P. (C) No.6831 of 2008. The interlocutory application is, accordingly, disposed of.

4. I.A. Nos.327-651 in S.L.P.(C) No.14454-14778 / 2008:
Pending further orders, there shall be stay of the impugned judgement till further orders in terms of prayer clause (a) to the extent held in para 13, which reads as under:
The State has no jurisdiction to impose tax on such goods imported from outside and are not manufactured within the State of Orissa. Therefore, the opposite parties may make scrutiny of the same and not realize entry tax on such goods .

5. In the meantime, this group of Orissa matters is adjourned for a period of three weeks. It is made clear that the State will submit the cut - off date for the simple reason that this Court intends to record that each and every assessee in this group of cases shall pay the outstanding amount, as of cut - off date, in instalments within the time fixed by this Court. Secondly, it is also made clear that, if the State ultimately loses, it shall refund the amount with interest which shall be fixed by this Court at the time of final hearing of these matters. However, each and every assessee in this group of cases shall undertake to pay the outstanding amount in instalments with the current liability that may accrue, pending disposal of these special leave petitions. It is further made clear that the assessee in this group of cases will have to deposit the outstanding taxes without penalty. Till the next date of hearing, no recovery for the time being.

6. I.A. No.1 in S.L.P. (C) No.15090 of 2009:
The interlocutory application is dismissed as not pressed.

7. I.A. No.3 in S.L.P. (C) No.26813 of 2008, I.A. No.6 in Civil Appeal No.4715 of 2008 and I.A. No.8 in Civil Appeal No.3453 of 2002: I.A. No.3 in S.L.P. (C) No.26813 of 2008 and I.A. No.6 in Civil Appeal No.4715 of 2008 are filed by the State of Haryana and I.A. No.8 in Civil Appeal No.3453 of 2002 is filed by the assessee.

8. It is pointed out that the levy of Entry tax has been struck down by the Punjab and Haryana High Court. In the circumstances, as of today, we cannot direct the assessees to pay the taxes under the Act, which is held to be un - constitutional. However, each and every assessee in this group of cases will file its Returns within a period of four weeks from today. The Assessing Officer will vet the Returns and pass assessment orders in accordance with law. However, there will be no recovery of tax till further orders of this Court, subject to each and every assessee in this group of cases giving an undertaking to the State and to this Court that, in the event of their ultimately losing the matter, they shall pay the amount due with interest at the rate that may be fixed by this Court at the time of final hearing of the matt





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
whatsapp-icon Back to top