1964 (4) TMI 103 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues:
Violation of principles of natural justice by the Assistant Commissioner and competence of the Tribunal to dispose of appeals based on materials on record.

Violation of Principles of Natural Justice by the Assistant Commissioner:
The case involved a dispute regarding the assessment of sales tax on rubbles supplied for construction. The Assistant Commissioner, Sri Ramarao, conducted further inquiries without informing the petitioner or providing an opportunity to rebut the evidence gathered. This action was held to be a violation of natural justice principles and the law laid down by the Supreme Court. The Tribunal found that Sri Ramarao did not hear the arguments of the appellant, which further supported the violation of natural justice. The Tribunal's decision was based on the fact that Sri Ramarao's order was contrary to the principles of natural justice, leading to the affirmative answer to the first question raised.

Competence of the Tribunal to Dispose of Appeals Based on Materials on Record:
The Tribunal decided the appeals on the materials on record after hearing the State representative, which was within its jurisdiction. The petitioner's absence during the hearing disabled him from rebutting the materials used by Sri Ramarao. The Tribunal's power under the relevant section of the Act was considered plenary and co-extensive with that of the first appellate Court. The Tribunal was deemed competent to dispose of the appeals based on the materials on record, especially since the petitioner did not avail the opportunity to challenge the evidence presented. This led to the affirmative answer to the second question raised.

Extraneous Materials Used by the Tribunal:
The contention that the Tribunal used extraneous materials without notice to the petitioner was raised. However, the Tribunal's emphasis on deciding based on the materials on record indicated that the documents produced by the State representative were likely not fresh but already part of the record. The argument regarding the introduction of extraneous evidence was not admissible as it was not part of the questions referred to the Court. The Court held that there was no evidence to suggest that the Tribunal used materials extraneous to those already considered by Sri Ramarao, leading to the dismissal of this contention.

In conclusion, both issues were answered in the affirmative, affirming the violation of natural justice by the Assistant Commissioner and the competence of the Tribunal to dispose of appeals based on the materials on record. The applications were dismissed with costs, and the reference was answered in the affirmative by the Court.