EICHER MOTORS LTD. Vs. COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dtd. 3/10/2005 whereby the Additional Commissioner, Commercial Tax, Indore has dismissed Revision Cases No. 37/05/Indore/Regional & 19/05/Indore/Central, filed under Sec. 62(1) of the Madhya Pradesh Commercial Tax Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as the 'MPCT Act') read with Sec. 9(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the 'CST Act') affirming the order dtd. 3/12/2024 passed by the Appellate Commissioner, Commercial Tax, Indore and order dtd. 29/6/2022 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Tax, Indore Division - 2.

(2.) FACTS OF THE CASE IN BRIEF :

(3.) Shri Manoj Munshi, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that in the original assessment order dtd. 29/6/2002, the Assessing Officer had accepted the claim of the petitioner and allowed the exemption w.e.f 1/2/1999. But thereafter, the Assessing Officer vide reassessment order dtd. 23/4/2003 under Sec. 28(1) has wrongly reopened the said concluded issue and forfeited the amount of Rs.73,81,605.00 out of the tax of Rs.76,61,873.00 deposited by the petitioner. The Assessing Officer not only forfeited the amount of tax of Rs.73,81,605.00 but also reduced the quantum of exemption of Rs.2,97,58,902.00 to an aggregate amount of Rs.2,58,16,895.00 thereby leaving the un-availed balance of Rs.39,42,007.00 for the next years. It is further submitted by learned senior counsel that as per the notification, petitioner was eligible to avail exemption from the date of installation of the Wind Generator irrespective of the date of issuance of eligibility certificates. The petitioner was issued eligibility certificates on 28/1/1999 with retrospective effect from 29/4/1998 to 31/1/1999 during which period, the petitioner bonafidely sold the product, collected the tax and deposited the same with the department. Even if the amount of Rs.73,81,605.00 has been forfeited, the reduction of the quantum of exemption during the period 29/4/1998 to 31/3/1999 is illegal and bad in law. The first appellate authority as well as the revisional authority has wrongly considered the issue and dismissed the appeal as well as the revision.