Manshi Automobiles VS Union Of India

This appears to be a legal document concerning a dispute between the petitioner and the tax authorities in Danapur Circle, Danapur, District Patna, related to the imposition of interest on the gross amount without deducting Input Tax Credit (ITC) and alleged violation of natural justice principles. The petitioner is seeking various reliefs through a writ application:

1. Quashing of the orders dated 10.08.2021 issued by the Additional Commissioner of State Taxes (Appeal), Patna West Division, rejecting the petitioner’s appeals against the orders passed by the A.C.S.T., Danapur Circle, Danapur, for different tax periods.

2. Issuance of a direction or order to restrain Respondent No. 5 from taking coercive action for recovery of the demanded amount during the pendency of the writ application, or directing refund of the amount if recovered.

3. Granting any other relief deemed appropriate based on the circumstances of the case.

The petitioner alleges that the impugned orders passed by the tax authorities were flawed as they imposed interest on the gross amount without considering the ITC already paid by the petitioner. Additionally, the rejection of the petitioner’s appeals by the Additional Commissioner of State Taxes (Appeal) was claimed to be done without proper consideration of the grounds raised by the petitioner.

Overall, the petitioner seeks judicial intervention to rectify what they perceive as errors in the tax authorities’ actions and to obtain relief from the undue burden imposed on them.

The document outlines that the respondent, or the learned counsel for the Revenue, doesn’t object to remanding the matter to the Assessing Authority for a fresh decision, indicating a willingness to have the case decided on its merits. Additionally, during the pendency of the case, no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner. This statement is accepted and taken on record.

However, the court asserts that it has the authority to intervene, notwithstanding the availability of statutory remedies, if it finds that the order is inherently flawed. The court identifies two key reasons for intervention:

1. Violation of principles of natural justice, specifically the fair opportunity of hearing, where the petitioner was not given sufficient time to represent their case.

2. The ex parte nature of the order, which lacks sufficient reasons discernible from the record to justify the determination of the amount due and payable by the assessee.

Given these reasons, the court decides to dispose of the present writ petition.

The following mutually agreeable terms have been established:

(a) The impugned orders dated 10.08.2021 passed by the Additional Commissioner of State Taxes (Appeal), Patna West Division, Patna, and the orders dated 25.02.2020 passed by the A.C.S.T., Danapur Circle, Danapur, District Patna, for different tax periods are quashed and set aside.

(b) The petitioner states that ten percent of the total amount, which is a condition prerequisite for hearing the appeal, has already been deposited. If not, it should be deposited before the next date.

(c) Additionally, the petitioner agrees to deposit ten percent of the amount of the demand raised in each case before the Assessing Officer within four weeks.

(d) This deposit is without prejudice to the respective rights and contentions of the parties and is subject to the order passed by the Assessing Officer. If it’s found that the petitioner’s deposit is in excess, appropriate action will be taken.These terms have been agreed upon and accepted by both parties involved.

(e) The amount deposited by the petitioner shall be refunded within two months from the date of passing of the order.

(f) The bank account(s) of the writ petitioner, if attached in reference to the proceedings, shall be immediately de-frozen or de-attached.

(g) The petitioner undertakes to appear before the Assessing Authority on 7th February 2022 at 10:30 A.M., if possible through digital mode.

(h) The Assessing Authority shall decide the case on merits after complying with the principles of natural justice.

(i) Opportunity of hearing shall be afforded to the parties to place on record all essential documents and materials, if so required and desired.

(j) During the pendency of the case, no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner.

(k) The Assessing Authority shall pass a fresh order only after affording adequate opportunity to all concerned, including the writ petitioner.

(l) The petitioner, through learned counsel, undertakes to fully cooperate in such proceedings and not take any action that may hinder the process.

The Assessing Authority shall decide the case on merits expeditiously, preferably within a period of two months from the date of this order.

Download PDF:

For Reference Visit:

Read Another Case Law:

GST Case Law: