CENTRAL COAL FIELDS LTD. Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, a subsidiary of the Coal India Limited, a Government of India Enterprise engaged in the sales of Coal, has filed inter alia a writ petition seeking for quashing of the garnishee order/Bank Attachment order passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Tenughat Circle, Phusro, Bokaro under Section 46 of the Jharkhand Value Added Tax Act, 2005 contained in Letter No. 87 dated 07.02.2014 (Annexure-7) by which the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Tax, Tenughat Circle, Phusro, Bokaro has directed the Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Bokaro Colliery Branch, Bokaro to pay in the Government treasury a sum of Rs. 3,14,80,798.00 for the period involved in this writ petition on account of balance tax due and/or penalty imposed and interest payable under the Jharkhand Value Added Tax Act, 2005, from the Bank Account of the petitioner and also seeking for a direction to forthwith refund the amount of Rs. 6,30,00,000/- to the petitioner along with the interest thereon, which is realized by the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Tengughat Circle, Phusro on different dates i.e. from 30.10.2013 to 24.01.2014 by attaching the Bank Account of the petitioner, despite the interim order of stay order dated 09.03.2013 by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Jharkhand, Ranchi.

(2.) In respect of the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer for the assessment year 2008-09, a revision has been filed before the Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Jharkhand, Ranchi in Revision Case No. CC(S) 161/162 of 2013 and vide order dated 09.03.2013, the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes passed the interim order, which reads as under:

(3.) According to the petitioner, in compliance of order of the Commissioner, Commercial Taxes dated 09.03.2013, the disputed 20% amount for the period 2008-09 comes at Rs. 1,96,96,160/- and Rs. 2,98,613/- and the same has already been realized. The grievance of the petitioner is that since, the amount (as per the interim order passed by the Commissioner, Commercial Taxes) has already been realised the Deputy Commissioner has no jurisdiction to issue the garnishee notice to put on hold the further amount as indicated in the garnishee notice dated 07.02.2014. Further grievance of the petitioner is that the Deputy Commissioner has passed the assessment order as well as the garnishee order ex-parte without affording an opportunity to the petitioner and submits that in view of violation of principles of natural justice, the writ petition is maintainable.