Case Law Details
Sunil Kumar Agrawal Vs State of Chhattisgarh Through Joint Commissioner (Chhattisgarh High Court)
Chhattisgarh High Court held that impugned order is not sustainable as Show Cause Notice under Section 49 (3) is not stated to be issued nor placed on record by learned counsel for the State.
Facts-
After issuance of work order by SECL, petitioners, who are registered dealer under the provisions of the Chhattisgarh Value Added Tax, 2005 (the Act of 2005) and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (the Act of 1956), submitted amendment application seeking incorporation of ‘High Speed Diesel HSD’ in their registration certificate for mining activities and granting permission to petitioners for inter-state purchase of HSD at concessional tax rates against C-Forms.
On making such application, registration certificates of petitioners were amended, ‘HSD for mining machineries’ was added with effect from respective dates mentioned in C-Forms of respective petitioners. After lapse of some time, respondent authority concerned issued letter/notice under Section 49 (1) of the Act of 2005 calling upon each petitioner individually to explain as to why entry ‘HSD for mining machineries’ made in their registration certificate be not deleted.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
