2013 (4) TMI 684 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues involved:
The judgment involves the dismissal of VAT appeals against the common order of the M. P. Commercial Tax Appellate Board u/s Central Sales Tax Act, VAT Act, and Entry Tax Act due to alleged violation of principles of natural justice and non-speaking cryptic assessment orders.

Violation of Principles of Natural Justice:
The appellant, a dealer in agricultural produce, was subject to assessment proceedings under VAT Act, Central Sales Tax Act, and Entry Tax Act. The appellant failed to appear during the assessment proceedings, leading to best judgment assessment. The appellant contended that the assessment orders were passed without giving an opportunity for a proper hearing. However, the court found that the appellant was indeed given a chance to be heard by the assessing authority and was called to verify information related to sales and purchases. Despite submitting a medical certificate citing illness, the court noted discrepancies in the certificate's dates and lack of material produced during the appeal process. The court concluded that the orders passed by the authorities were well-reasoned and that the appellant had sufficient opportunity to present their case.

Question of Law:
Upon review of the facts and arguments presented, the court determined that no question of law merited consideration. The court held that the appellant's claim of not being afforded a proper opportunity for hearing was unfounded, given the opportunities provided during the assessment and appeal stages. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed, and a signed order was directed to be kept in the respective appeal files.

Conclusion:
In summary, the High Court of Madhya Pradesh dismissed the VAT appeals filed against the common order of the Commercial Tax Appellate Board, finding no violation of natural justice in the assessment proceedings. The court emphasized that the appellant had been given adequate opportunities for hearing, and the orders passed by the authorities were deemed well-reasoned. As no substantial question of law was identified, the appeals were dismissed accordingly.