9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (2) TMI 1162 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxRevision of already concluded assessment - Petitioner submitted that assessment order was passed by the DETC, Hisar. The show cause notice for re-assessment under Section 40(2) of the Act was, therefore, required to be issued by an officer senior to the DETC, Hisar, but has been issued by an officer of co-ordinate rank, namely, the DETC (Inspection-cum-Revisional Authority), thereby rendering the impugned notice null and void - Held that - in view of statement made by the State of Haryana, on instructions from Mr. Ajay Sihag, Excise and Taxation Officer, Hisar, the show cause notice impugned in the present petition may be treated as withdrawn but with liberty to the State to serve a fresh notice under Section 40(2) of the 1973 Act, after following procedure prescribed by law and the show cause notice is set aside. - Decided in favour of petitioner
Issues:
1. Validity of show cause notice issued under Section 40(2) of the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1972. 2. Authority of the officer issuing the show cause notice. 3. Withdrawal of the impugned notice and liberty to serve a fresh notice. Issue 1: Validity of show cause notice under Section 40(2) of the Act The petitioner sought a writ of certiorari to quash a show cause notice issued under Section 40(2) of the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1972, proposing to revise an already concluded assessment. The counsel for the petitioner argued that the notice was null and void as it was issued by an officer of the same rank as the one who passed the original assessment order, contrary to the requirement for a senior officer to issue such a notice. The High Court considered this argument in light of the provisions of the Act. Issue 2: Authority of the officer issuing the show cause notice The counsel for the State of Haryana informed the court that the Excise and Taxation Officer, Hisar, had instructed to withdraw the impugned show cause notice. The State expressed its intention to serve a fresh notice under Section 40(2) of the Act after following the prescribed legal procedure. The High Court took note of this statement and considered the authority of the officer issuing the notice in the context of the Act. Issue 3: Withdrawal of the impugned notice and liberty to serve a fresh notice After hearing the arguments from both parties and considering the statement made by the counsel for the State of Haryana, the High Court allowed the writ petition. The court set aside the show cause notice but granted liberty to the State of Haryana to proceed afresh under Section 40(2) of the Act in accordance with the law. This decision was made without prejudice to the rights of the parties involved, ensuring fairness and adherence to legal procedures. In conclusion, the High Court's judgment addressed the validity of the show cause notice, the authority of the officer issuing the notice, and the withdrawal of the impugned notice with liberty to serve a fresh notice. The decision reflected a balanced approach, upholding legal principles and ensuring procedural fairness in the matter related to the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1972.
|
