LAWS(P&H)-1997-5-21

AGGARWAL FOODS Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

Decided On May 16, 1997
AGGARWAL FOODS Appellant
V/S
STATE OF HARYANA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WHETHER the proceedings initiated by the Assessing Authority on the allegation that the petitioners have not deposited the tax collected/received by them from Department of Food and Civil Supplies and the instructions, issued by the Commercial Tax Commissioner vide memo No. 653/st-I, dated February 26, 1997 are liable to be voided on the ground that they are violative of the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973 and the Haryana General Sales Tax Rules, 1975 is the main issues which arises for adjudication in these petitions.

(2.) FOR the purpose of this order, it is sufficient to notice the facts of C. W. P. No. 3154 of 1997. The petitioner, M/s Aggarwal Foods, is a dealer registered under the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973. It installed one unit for rice shelling at village Kunjpura, District Karnal. The General Manager, District Industries Centre, Karnal, issued eligibility certificate for a sum of Rs. 29,04,070 to the petitioner on April 8, 1996 on the recommendation of the Lower Level Screening Committee for a period of seven years commencing from November 1, 1995 subject to the conditions that the petitioner will have to deposit the tax already collected. The respondent No. 3 also issued exemption certificate to the petitioner under rule 28-A (2) (k-i) of the Rules of 1975 subject to the condition that the petitioner will deposit the tax received from D. F. S. C.

(3.) IN the return field by the respondents, an objection has been raised to the maintainability of the writ petition on the ground that the petitioner has failed to avail the statutory alternative remedy available to it under rule 28-A (5) (f) of the Rules of 1975. It has also been pleaded that the writ petition is premature. The respondents have also alleged that the petitioner has been collecting tax from the District Food and Supplies Controller in the shape of sale price of the rice which includes the element of purchase tax. The respondents have pleaded that the petitioner accepted the certificates issued by the competent authorities without any protest or objection and therefore, it is not entitled to raise dispute regarding the validity of the said condition.