M/s Infra Equip Pvt. Ltd v. The Commissioner of State Tax, State Tax Department, Government of Jharkhand

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR RAI --------- For the Petitioner For the Respondent s : Mr. Sanjay Kr. Prasad, Advocate : Mr. Ashok Kr. Yadav, Sr. S.C-I Mr. Aditya Kumar, AC to Sr. S.C-I 06/ Dated: 9th September 2024 --------- The instant writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:

(a) For quashing and setting aside the ex-parte re- assessment order dated 17.11.2022 (Annexure-2) passed/issued by the Deputy Commissioner of State Tax, Dhanbad Circle, Dhanbad (Respondent No.2), under Section 42 (3) of the Jharkhand Value Added Tax Act, 2005 for the period 2013-14, whereby and whereunder, the said Assessing Authority, just on the basis of Para-26 of the Audit Objection Report No. SRA II- 74/ 2019-20, has re-opened the completed assessment order dated 31.03.2017 (Annexure-1) and assessed tax to the tune of Rs.24,40,166.86 and imposed penalty of Rs.73,20,500.58 under Section 26 (1) of the said Act, total being Rs.97,60,667.00, whereas the fact of the matter is that the said ex-parte re- assessment order dated 17.11.2022 (Annexure-2) has been passed beyond the statutory period of limitation prescribed under the JVAT Act and Section 42(3) of the JVAT Act is only a provision which provides the circumstances under which re- assessment proceedings can be initiated, and the only enabling provision for carrying out re-assessment proceedings under the Act is contained under Section 40 read with Section 40 (4) of the JVAT Act, which prescribes the period of limitation of five years and since the re-assessment orders for the period 2013-14 has been passed beyond the statutory period of five years, the same is without jurisdiction. For quashing and setting aside the Notice of Demand (b) No. 2029 dated 17.11.2022 (Annexure-3) Respondent No.2, arising out of above the ex-parte re- assessment order dated 17.11.2022 (Annexure-2), whereby the petitioner has been directed to deposit an amount of Rs.97,60,667.00.

issued by

Mr. Ashok Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the respondents has raised the issue of availability of alternative remedy of appeal, as such, the issue may be decided on the ground of availability of alternative remedy of appeal.

Upon this, Mr. Sanjay Kumar Prasad, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner seeks leave of this Court that this writ petition may be disposed of considering the fact that the alternative remedy is available, and as such liberty may be given to the writ petitioner to file an appeal before the appellate forum.

If such appeal will be filed, the competent authority is directed to decide the same within a period of six weeks thereafter after hearing the affected parties and on its merit.

Accordingly, the instant writ petition is disposed of. (Sujit Narayan Prasad, A.C.J.) (Arun Kumar Rai, J.) Pramanik/ 2