Sabyasachi Roy, Member (T) - (1.) IN this application filed under section 8 of the West Bengal Taxation Tribunal Act, 1987, Sri Jamshed Alam (petitioner) carrying on a proprietorship business in the name of M/s. Mashood Alam & Co., has challenged the impugned suo motu revisional order dated July 2, 2010 passed by the Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, South Circle (respondent No. 2) in revising the assessment order dated November 14, 2008 passed by the Sales Tax Officer, Ballygunge Charge (respondent No. 1) for the period of four quarters ending March 31, 2006. The petitioner was assessed by respondent No. 1 for the period of four quarters ending March 31, 2006 on November 14, 2008 and a demand notice showing excess payment of Rs. 14,22,410 had been issued. No action whatsoever for refunding the aforesaid sum of Rs. 14,22,410 was taken by respondent No. 1 till April, 2009 when by filing a letter before respondent No. 1 on April 30, 2009, the petitioner requested for payment of the refundable amount. As stated in the application, the petitioner submitted another letter again on February 23, 2010 requesting expeditious disposal of the refund matter.
(2.) AS alleged in the application, the petitioner was surprised to receive a notice dated April 23, 2010 from respondent No. 2 on July 22, 2010 intimating initiation of a suo motu revisional proceedings fixing date of hearing on May 24, 2010. It has also been alleged that in the said notice there was no "gist of the proposed order to be passed" as was mandatory under rule 143(1) of the West Bengal Value Added Tax Rules, 2005. In this application, the petitioner has challenged the impugned suo motu revisional notice which was served on the petitioner on July 12, 2010, i.e., long after the date fixed for hearing as mentioned in the said notice. By filing supplementary affidavit, the petitioner has subsequently challenged the suo motu revisional order dated July 2, 2010 passed by respondent No. 2 on the basis of such notice.
(3.) SRI D. Gangopadhyay, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submitted that the assessment for the period of four quarters ending March 31, 2006 had been completed by respondent No. 1 on November 14, 2008 showing excess payment of Rs. 14,22,410 and inspite of several letters being issued by the petitioner, respondent No. 1 did not act on arranging for such refund.;