2008 (8) TMI 829 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Notice for assessment challenged - Held that - As after notification dated July 4, 2008 when the jurisdiction of Barabanki Circle was transferred from the Joint Commissioner (Executive), Commercial Taxes, Lucknow Range A, Lucknow to the Joint Commissioner (Executive), Commercial Taxes, Faizabad Range B, Faizabad and thereafter by the notification dated July 7, 2008 the jurisdiction of Range B, Faizabad was given to the Joint Commissioner (Executive) Faizabad Range A, Faizabad, the Joint Commissioner (Executive), Commercial Taxes, Faizabad Range B, Faizabad was having no jurisdiction to issue notice under section 10B of the Act on July 23, 2008. The notices issued on July 23, 2008 for the assessment years 2003-04 and 2004-05 are legally not sustainable. In the result, the writ petition succeeds and is hereby partly allowed. The impugned notices dated July 23, 2008, the copies of which have been annexed as annexure 4 to the writ petition, are hereby quashed. It will be open for the respondent No. 3 to proceed on the basis of the earlier notices dated June 17, 2008. The petitioner shall be entitled to file objection against the notices dated June 17, 2008 issued by the Joint Commissioner (Executive), Commercial Taxes, Lucknow Range A, Lucknow within two weeks.

Summary

Issues: Jurisdictional transfer of assessing authority, legality of notice issued by the new authority

The judgment involves a challenge by the petitioner against a notice issued by the Joint Commissioner (Executive), Commercial Taxes, Faizabad Range B, for the assessment years 2003-04 and 2004-05. The petitioner, a registered dealer under the U.P. Trade Tax Act and the Central Sales Tax Act, had purchased mentha oil on behalf of an ex-U.P. principal. The petitioner alleged that a subsequent notice issued by the new authority was arbitrary and illegal. The respondents argued that the jurisdiction of the assessing authority had been transferred, justifying the new notice. The High Court considered the submissions and reviewed the record.

The Court noted that the assessment orders for the relevant years were passed earlier, and no appeal was filed by the petitioner. It was established that the jurisdiction of the assessing authority had been transferred from Lucknow to Faizabad. However, the subsequent notice issued by the Faizabad authority was deemed to lack jurisdiction. The Court emphasized that the new notices were similar to the earlier ones and were legally unsustainable post the jurisdictional transfer.

Consequently, the Court partially allowed the writ petition, quashing the impugned notices dated July 23, 2008. The respondent was directed to proceed based on the earlier notices from June 17, 2008. The petitioner was granted two weeks to file objections against the earlier notices, and the respondent was instructed to consider and decide the matter in accordance with the law.