STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. SHAKTI CONTAINERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All these Tax Appeals have been preferred by the State of Gujarat under Section 78 of the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") challenging the impugned common judgment and order dated 09.03.2012 passed by the learned Gujarat Value Added Tax Tribunal, Ahmedabad (hereinafter referred to as the "Appellate Tribunal") passed in Revision Application Nos. 109 to 112 of 2010.

(2.) A preliminary objection is raised by Shri Vasave, learned advocate for respondent with respect to maintainability of the present appeal under Section 70 of the Act before this Court against the impugned judgment and order passed by the Appellate Tribunal passed in Revision Application Nos. 109 to 112 of 2010. Shri Vasave, learned advocate for the respondent has vehemently submitted that against the impugned judgment and order passed by the Tribunal passed in Revision Applications, appeal under Section 78 of the Act shall not be maintainable. It is submitted that under Section 78 of the Act the appeal shall lie to the High Court from the every order passed in Appeal by the Tribunal, if the High Court is satisfied that the caseinvolvesa substantial question of law. It is submitted that in the present case impugned judgment and order is passed by the Tribunal in the revision applications in exercise of powers under Section 74 of the Act and therefore, against the said judgment and order passed in revision applications, appeal under Section 78 of the Act shall not be maintainable before this Court. Making above submissions, it is requested to dismiss the present appeals as not maintainable.

(3.) Shri Gandhi, learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the State Government has submitted that as such revision applications preferred by the respondent before the learned Appellate Tribunal was in the form of appeal and therefore, considering Section 73(1) of the Act, it is submitted that despite the fact that nomenclature given by the Tribunal is revision application, it would be an appeal before the Tribunal and therefore, the appeal before this Court under Section 78 of the Act would be maintainable.