2007 (3) TMI 721 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues:
Assessment orders for three different assessment periods challenged based on gross turnover determination.

Analysis:
The petitioner, involved in veterinary drugs and medicines, challenged assessment orders for three different assessment periods (1992-93, 1993-94, 1994-95) where the assessing authority fixed gross turnovers at Rs. 2 crores each, not accepting the figures submitted by the petitioner. The petitioner's books of accounts were seized in connection with fodder scam cases, leading to the inability to produce them during assessment proceedings.

The Commissioner, Commercial Taxes accepted the petitioner's plea regarding the seized books of accounts and remitted the assessment proceedings for all six assessment periods, giving time to produce the books of account. The petitioner managed to produce the books for the later assessment periods (1995-96 to 1997-98), leading to acceptance of the submitted gross turnovers for those periods.

However, the petitioner failed to produce books of account for the assessment periods in question (1992-93 to 1994-95), resulting in the assessing officer maintaining the earlier figure of Rs. 2 crores as the gross turnover for each of these years without providing any reasons for the determination.

The assessing officer's arbitrary determination of gross turnover without justification was challenged by the petitioner, highlighting the acceptance of submitted figures for later periods where books were produced. The petitioner committed to submitting the books of account for the three disputed periods within a month.

Considering the circumstances and the petitioner's commitment to producing the books of account, the Court set aside the impugned orders and remitted the matter back to the Assistant Commissioner, directing a fresh assessment for the three years in question. The petitioner was instructed to appear before the Assistant Commissioner with a copy of the order within two weeks and provide the books of account by a specified date. The Assistant Commissioner was mandated to pass orders after hearing the petitioner.

Ultimately, the writ petitions were allowed, subject to the stated observations and directions, providing the petitioner with an opportunity to present the books of account for the disputed assessment periods and undergo a fresh assessment based on the actual records.