KAYAN AGRO INDUSTRIES & CO PVT LTD & ANR Vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, SILIGURI CIRCLE & ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) An order passed by the settlement authority exercising jurisdiction under the provisions of the West Bengal Sales Tax (Settlement of Dispute) Act, 1999 is under challenge in the present writ petition.

(2.) Learned advocate for the petitioner draws the attention of the Court to the impugned order dated June 9, 2017. He submits that, the settlement authority refused to entertain the application for settlement on the ground that, the petitioner does not possess an eligibility certificate. According to the impugned order, the eligibility certificate is to be considered as a certificate for the purpose of Section 7(1)(a)(i) of the West Bengal Sales Tax (Settlement of Dispute) Act, 1999. Non-production of such eligibility certificate means that the applicant has to pay 100% of the disputed tax. Since the petitioner did not pay 100% of the disputed tax, the application for settlement was rejected. He submits that, the settlement authority had misconstrued and misapplied the provisions of Section 7 of the Act of 1999. Section 7 of the Act of 1999 does not contemplate that, the applicant applying for settlement must possess any certificate such as an eligibility certificate or an enrolment certificate or otherwise for the purpose of the settlement authority assuming the jurisdiction on the subject of settlement. The settlement authority is to look at and consider whether, the prerequisites of Section 4 of the Act of 1999 stand satisfied and whether the applicant before it has paid the remaining balance amount of tax in dispute in the manner prescribed. Section 7(1)(a)(i) of the Act of 1999 does not contemplate an eligibility certificate when it refers to a certificate or a declaration therein. Explanation (I) clarifies the situation. Consequently, the impugned order needs to be quashed. The Settlement Commission be directed to entertain the application of the petitioner, in accordance with law.

(3.) Learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the respondents submits that, the petitioner has to satisfy the ingredients of Section 4 of the Act of 1999 to approach the Settlement Commission. Section 7 of the Act of 1999 allows the settlement authority to take a particular view on the subject. The settlement authority is entitled to reject the application when it finds, the prerequisites of Section 4 or the quantum of deposit required under Section 7 not being fulfilled. In the present case, the settlement authority having returned a finding that, the prescribed quantum of deposit not being made by the petitioner, no interference is called for.