Morinda Co-Operative Sugar Mills Ltd. vs State of Punjab and Others

Rajive Bhalla, J.—The petitioner challenges dismissal of his appeal and various other applications arising from its failure to comply with an

order of pre-deposit. The petitioner filed an appeal before the Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner (Appeals), Patiala Division, Patiala.

Vide order dated May 28, 2004, the petitioner was directed to deposit 25 per cent of the total additional demand and to produce tax deposit

receipt on June 23, 2004, failing which the appeal was liable to be dismissed. The petitioner did not comply with this order leading to dismissal of

the appeal. The petitioner approached the Sales Tax Tribunal-II, Punjab. Vide order dated October 6, 2004, the petitioner was allowed to

deposit a nominal amount of 25 per cent for cases up to the year 1999-2000. The petitioner thereafter filed an application for rectification by

pointing out that inadvertently the amount demanded with respect to assessment year 2000-01 had been omitted. The application was allowed on

January 11, 2005 by directing deposit of 25 per cent of the additional demand by March 31, 2005. The petitioner filed another application, styled

as an application for rectification and also prayed for extension of time. The Tribunal vide order dated July 5, 2005, declined rectification on

October 25, 2005. As the petitioner did not deposit the duty demanded within the time granted the appeal was dismissed on May 17, 2006 by the

Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner (Appeals), Patiala Division, Patiala. The appeal filed before the Tribunal was also dismissed.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that as the petitioner had already filed a reference application on December 31, 2005 which is pending, the

Tribunal should not have dismissed the appeal. It is contended that even otherwise as the petitioner has deposited the entire amount, the Deputy

Excise and Taxation Commissioner may be directed to hear the appeal on merits.

The counsel for the State of Punjab submits that though the conduct of the petitioner does not merit any special consideration but as the

petitioner has deposited 25 per cent of the additional demand, this court may pass such order as it may deem appropriate after taking into

consideration the conduct of the petitioner.

We have heard counsel for the parties and while deprecating this practice of filing repeated applications for rectification and appeals with the

sole object of seeking deferment of payment of tax, but cannot ignore the fact that the petitioner has deposited the amount due though after a great

degree of delay and, therefore, set aside the impugned order dated July 22, 2013 and remit the matter to the Deputy Excise and Taxation

Commissioner to decide, the appeal on merits. The petitioner shall, however be liable to pay Rs. 15,000 as costs for delay and unnecessary

wastage of the time of various Tribunals and courts, to be deposited with the Punjab and Haryana High Court Legal Services Committee within

one month from today. The parties are directed to appear before the Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner on February 10, 2014.

The petition stands disposed of accordingly.