2013 (2) TMI 651 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues Involved:
Challenge to assessment order based on lack of valid authorization and merits of assessment order.

The judgment addresses the challenge to an assessment order dated June 19, 2012 for the tax period February 1, 2009 to March 31, 2011. The order was upheld in appeal by the third respondent. The petitioner questioned the assessment order on the grounds of lack of valid authorization and the merits of the assessment order. The Deputy Commissioner had issued a conditional authorization for assessment in case of under-declaration of turnover, but the assessment order was not invalidated by the appellate authority despite this conditional authorization.

The primary issue addressed by the court was the validity of the authorization for assessment dated January 21, 2012 issued by the Deputy Commissioner (CT), Kurnool. The court noted that the authorization failed to explicitly record the Deputy Commissioner's satisfaction regarding the under-declaration of turnover. Instead, it delegated this satisfaction to the assessing authority, which was deemed unsustainable. The court cited legal precedent to emphasize that public orders must derive their vitality from their content, and errors cannot be rectified by reference to antecedent material on record. Therefore, the authorization for assessment was deemed unsustainable, leading to the quashing of the assessment order and its confirmation by the appellate authority.

The court ultimately allowed the writ petition, quashed the assessment orders, and directed that a fresh order of assessment be passed by the duly authorized officer in accordance with the law. The judgment highlights the importance of proper authorization and adherence to legal principles in the assessment process to ensure the validity of tax assessments.