2004 (2) TMI 662 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues:
Violation of principles of natural justice in assessment orders for the period from April to July, 2003 under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act and the Central Sales Tax Act.

Analysis:
The petitioner, a dealer in raw rubber, challenged assessment orders (exhibits P13 and P14) for the period from April to July, 2003, alleging gross violation of natural justice principles. The respondent made assessments based on alleged clandestine transactions without providing necessary documents to the petitioner. The petitioner filed objections seeking documents obtained on enquiry, but only received photocopies of seized documents later. The petitioner also requested cross-examination of officers in possession of relevant records, highlighting the lack of document supply and cross-examination opportunity in the assessments completed hastily after objections were filed.

The respondent, in the assessment order, claimed to have provided photocopies of seized delivery notes to the petitioner, arguing that no other documents were received. The Investigation Wing collected duplicate copies of delivery notes and N forms filed by the petitioner, accusing the petitioner of delaying assessment without valid reasons. The assessments were based on discrepancies between original and duplicate copies of documents, leading to turnover determination without furnishing crucial documents to the petitioner.

The court found a clear violation of natural justice principles due to the respondent's failure to supply necessary documents for assessment purposes. While acknowledging the importance of documents in assessments, the court did not find it necessary to summon check-post officers for cross-examination, stating that the documents themselves should suffice. Consequently, the court quashed exhibits P13 and P14, directing the respondent to provide photocopies of declarations and N forms relied upon for assessments, allowing the petitioner to respond and be heard within specified timelines.

Additionally, the court criticized assessing authorities for hasty assessments under pressure, emphasizing the importance of procedural safeguards and fair assessments. The court highlighted the need for diligent compliance with procedural requirements, including providing sufficient time for responses and personal hearings, to ensure fairness and avoid arbitrary actions in assessments. The judgment concluded by directing the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes to issue instructions for strict compliance with procedural safeguards in assessments to protect the interests of both the assessee and the Revenue.

In conclusion, the court's decision focused on upholding natural justice principles, ensuring proper document supply, and emphasizing the importance of fair and diligent assessment procedures to safeguard the interests of both parties involved in tax assessments.