1987 (8) TMI 427 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues:
1. Failure to provide notice for the adjourned hearing date by the Sales Tax Tribunal.
2. Admissibility of additional evidence in appeal proceedings.
3. Failure of the Sales Tax Tribunal to consider the merits of the case regarding the nature of transactions.

Analysis:

1. The first issue revolves around the failure of the Sales Tax Tribunal to provide notice for the adjourned hearing date, leading to the ex parte decision against the assessee. The Court emphasized the importance of principles of natural justice and statutory provisions requiring notice to be served to the parties. The Court referred to a previous decision highlighting the necessity for a fresh notice for an adjourned date to afford a reasonable opportunity of hearing. As the notice was not issued for the adjourned date in this case, the Court deemed the impugned order invalid due to a breach of procedural requirements.

2. The second issue concerns the admissibility of additional evidence in appeal proceedings under section 12-B of the Act. The Court analyzed the exceptions provided under this section, emphasizing that if evidence is allowed without objection, parties cannot later challenge its admissibility. The Court noted that the Assistant Commissioner had the discretion to admit additional evidence at the appellate stage, and in this case, the Revenue did not object to the evidence presented. The Court found that the Sales Tax Tribunal erred in disregarding the additional evidence solely based on the lack of an opportunity for the Revenue to rebut it. The Court held that the Tribunal should have considered the evidence or remanded the matter for further proceedings instead of dismissing it on procedural grounds.

3. The third issue relates to the Sales Tax Tribunal's failure to delve into the merits of the case regarding the nature of transactions, specifically whether they constituted "works contract." The Court observed that the Tribunal did not provide its own decision on this crucial aspect and merely restored the assessing officer's order. The Court highlighted the importance of considering the substance of the case and directed the Tribunal to reevaluate the appeal, considering the nature of transactions and providing due notice to the assessee for a fair hearing. The Court set aside the Tribunal's order and instructed a fresh decision in accordance with the law and the Court's observations.