2013 (2) TMI 640 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Additional tax and interest - increase in rate - tax on Composition Scheme - reopening of assessment - Held that - Tax Board, was justified in dismissing the appeals filed by the Department-petitioner. It is apparent on the face of the record that the assessee-respondent opted for the Composition Scheme,1999 which was applicable for a period of five years and he had to deposit the tax as per the Scheme to avail of the benefit of the said Scheme. It is prescribed in the said Scheme itself, that even the certificate issued under the said Scheme is deemed to be an assessment order and therefore, when the assessee had complied with the directives of the Scheme, by later notifications, his right could not have been curtailed. The Department was precluded from levying additional tax in the light of the two notifications, which was issued at later point of time, the assessing officer was not justified in going behind and holding that the said notifications have retrospective effect. It is also apparent from the record that even no notice was given to the respondent-assessee before passing of the assessment order by the petitioner and without notice the said assessment order was passed, which is also in utter violation of principles of natural justice and cannot be sustained. Therefore, the assessing officer, was not at all justified in re-opening the concluded assessment based on Composition Scheme by merely passing a fresh order. Against department.

Summary

Issues:
1. Validity of imposition of additional tax and interest under the Composition Scheme.
2. Retrospective effect of notifications issued by the Commercial Taxes Department.
3. Compliance with principles of natural justice in assessment proceedings.

Analysis:
1. Validity of imposition of additional tax and interest under the Composition Scheme:
The case involved a dispute regarding the imposition of additional tax and interest under a Composition Scheme for Sarrafa/bullion dealers. The respondent had opted for the Scheme in 1999, which was valid for five years. The assessing officer levied additional tax and interest based on notifications issued in 2002 and 2003. The Deputy Commissioner held that once the respondent opted for the Scheme, additional tax could not be levied. The Rajasthan Tax Board also rejected the Department's appeals, emphasizing that the additional tax should not have been imposed once the respondent had opted for the Composition Scheme. The High Court concurred, stating that the assessing officer was not justified in levying additional tax as the Scheme's benefits should have been given for the entire duration of the Scheme. The Court highlighted that the right conferred by a beneficial scheme cannot be curtailed by later notifications and that no notice was given to the respondent before passing the assessment order, violating principles of natural justice.

2. Retrospective effect of notifications issued by the Commercial Taxes Department:
The Department argued that the notifications issued by the Commercial Taxes Department had retrospective effect, justifying the imposition of additional tax. However, the High Court disagreed, stating that the notifications could not curtail the rights of the assessee-respondent conferred by the Composition Scheme. The Court emphasized that benefits granted under a scheme should continue until the scheme's duration, and the assessing officer was not justified in re-opening the assessment based on later notifications. The Court held that the notifications were prospective and could not affect the rights accrued under the original Scheme.

3. Compliance with principles of natural justice in assessment proceedings:
The High Court also noted that passing an assessment order without giving notice to the respondent violated principles of natural justice. The Court emphasized that if an assessment is to be reopened, reasons must be recorded, and passing an order solely based on later notifications is not justified. The Court highlighted the importance of adhering to natural justice principles in assessment proceedings to ensure fairness and procedural regularity.

In conclusion, the High Court upheld the Rajasthan Tax Board's decision, dismissing the Department's revision petitions as devoid of merits. The Court found the Tax Board's order just, proper, and reasonable, without any perversity warranting interference.