STATE BANK OF INDIA Vs. STATE OF ODISHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question raised for consideration is whether the petitioner-bank is covered by definition of "dealer" under Section 2(12) of the Orissa Value Added Tax Act, 2004 (OVAT Act) and liable to value added tax on sale of pledged assets effected by it for recovery of loan.

(2.) The case set out in this petition is that the petitioner has been constituted under the State Bank of India Act, 1955. Its Stressed Assets Management Branch initiated action under Section 13 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) for enforcing the security interest to realize the outstanding loan dues from the borrowers whose account had been classified as Non-Performing Assets (NPA). The movable assets of such borrowers were put to auction under Rule 6 of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002 and sale proceeds were appropriated to the loan account of the borrowers. The Sales Tax Officer, opposite party no.4 issued notice to the Bank to produce the accounts. In reply, stand of the bank was that it was not covered by the definition 'dealer' and was not liable to be assessed under the OVAT Act. In the auction conducted by the petitioner, no element of 'sale' was involved. However, rejecting the stand of the petitioner vide impugned order dated 12.12.2013, demand of tax and penalty was raised which according to the petitioner-Bank is illegal and without jurisdiction. The Assessing Authority has relied upon the judgment of this Court dated 12.3.2012 in WP (C) No. 3127 of 2012 (M/s. Indusind Bank Ltd. Vs. Principal Secretary to Government, Finance Department, Government of Odisha ) and order of West Bengal Taxation Tribunal in ICICI Bank Ltd. vs. Joint Commissioner, Sales Tax, Central Section, Kolkata),2010 31 VST 178. According to the petitioner, in absence of clear provision specifying the subject of tax, person liable to pay tax and the rate at which tax is to be paid, no tax could be levied.

(3.) We have heard Sri R.K.Rath, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. R.P.Kar, learned Standing Counsel (Commercial Department) for the opposite parties.