2005 (8) TMI 644 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues: Jurisdiction of the assessing authority to pass penalty orders under section 7-A(2) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957

In this judgment by the Andhra Pradesh High Court, the petitioner challenged penalty orders dated March 30, 2005, passed by the first respondent under section 7-A(2) of the Act for the year 2000-01. The impugned order highlighted that exempted turnover included sales of groundnuts taxable in Andhra Pradesh, where the documents provided by the assessee were deemed not genuine, leading to proposed withdrawal of exemption and imposition of tax and penalty. The core issue revolved around the jurisdiction of the first respondent to pass the penalty order. The court referenced the decision in Sanmathi Udyog v. Commercial Tax Officer, emphasizing that the power under section 7-A(2) can only be exercised by the assessing authority as defined by the Act. The court noted that the Deputy Commissioner, not being a notified assessing authority, lacked the jurisdiction to pass such orders.

The judgment further addressed the argument based on section 14(4-C) of the Act, contending that higher authorities, including the Deputy Commissioner, could exercise the power conferred by sub-section (4-C) of section 14. However, the court rejected this argument, asserting that allowing higher authorities to exercise such power would undermine the assessee's right to appeal against the assessing authority's orders. The court concluded that the impugned orders reviewing the penalty exceeded the jurisdiction of the Deputy Commissioner and consequently quashed the order, while allowing the competent authority to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with the law, subject to a separate evaluation on its merits. Ultimately, the writ petition was allowed with no costs incurred.