2014 (7) TMI 1090 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Rejection of applications filed under Section 5 of the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax Settlement of Arrears Act, 2011 - petitioner paid the lesser interest amount, than the amount originally payable - Held that - if the first respondent had any grievance over the payment of interest on the part of the petitioner, he would have intimated the same to the petitioner within ten days from the date of receipt of such application and if the defects could have been pointed out by the first respondent in time, the petitioner can have a chance to rectify the same. However, the first respondent had failed to do so. Hence, this Court is of the view that the impugned orders cannot be sustained in the eye of law. - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues: Challenge to Government Order under Tamil Nadu Sales Tax Act

Analysis:
The judgment involves a challenge to a Government Order under the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax Act [Settlement of Arrears] Act, 2011. The petitioner, a manufacturer of cotton and blended yarn, filed applications under Section 5 of the Act for the assessment years 2003-2004, 2004-2005, and 2005-2006. The first respondent proposed to reject the applications due to the petitioner paying a lesser interest amount than originally payable. The petitioner submitted objections, but the first respondent confirmed the proposal, leading to the Writ Petitions challenging the decision.

The petitioner contended that the delay in passing revised assessment orders by the second respondent caused a 30-month delay, for which the petitioner should not be blamed. The petitioner also highlighted the failure of the authority to point out defects in the applications within the specified time frame as per Section 3(5) of the Act. Despite these issues, the first respondent rejected the applications submitted by the petitioner for the mentioned assessment years.

The Court considered the arguments presented and reviewed a detailed working sheet provided by the petitioner for the assessment years in question. It was noted that the first respondent did not intimate any grievance regarding interest payment within the specified timeframe, depriving the petitioner of the opportunity to rectify any defects. Consequently, the Court held that the impugned orders could not be sustained in the eye of the law.

As a result, the Court set aside the impugned orders and directed the petitioner to submit the working sheet to the first respondent for reconsideration within two weeks. The first respondent was instructed to review the working sheet and pass appropriate orders within six weeks thereafter. The Writ Petitions were allowed with no costs, and connected Miscellaneous Petitions were closed.

This comprehensive analysis addresses the issues raised in the judgment, covering the challenges faced by the petitioner under the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax Act and the Court's decision in response to the arguments presented.