9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (11) TMI 1411 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxRevision of assessment proceedings - Section 84 of the TNVAT Act read with Section 9(2) of the CST Act, 1956 - Held that - the entire matter, as projected by the petitioner in the petition dated 26.10.2015, has not been considered - the respondent has referred only to C and F Forms, but has not referred to Form WW along with xerox copy of annual returns, export documents and other documents produced by the petitioner - the order has not even referred to the petition under Section 84 of the State Act, 2006 read with Section 9(2) of the Central Act, the matter requires consideration - respondent is directed to redo the assessment only in respect of the issues, which were not considered and pass a fresh order in accordance with law - appeal allowed by way of remand.
Issues: Assessment under Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 for the year 2013-14; Revision of assessment under Section 84 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act read with Section 9(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956.
The judgment pertains to an assessment order under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 for the year 2013-14, challenged through a petition filed by the petitioner seeking revision of assessment under Section 84 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act read with Section 9(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. The petitioner submitted various documents including Form WW, export documents, and others for consideration. However, the impugned order dated 14.6.2016 only referred to C and F Forms, neglecting the documents submitted by the petitioner. The court observed that the respondent failed to consider the entirety of the petitioner's submissions, necessitating a reconsideration of the matter. Therefore, the court partly allowed the writ petition, setting aside the order dated 14.6.2016 insofar as it did not take into account the documents provided by the petitioner. The court directed the respondent to reassess the issues not considered and to pass a fresh order in compliance with the law. In the judgment, the court highlighted the discrepancy in the respondent's assessment order, emphasizing that the documents submitted by the petitioner, such as Form WW, export documents, and other relevant records, were not adequately addressed. The court noted that the respondent's failure to reference the petition under Section 84 of the State Act read with Section 9(2) of the Central Act indicated a lack of comprehensive consideration of the petitioner's case. As a result, the court intervened by partially allowing the writ petition and instructing the respondent to conduct a fresh assessment focusing on the unaddressed issues while maintaining the findings related to C and F Forms, for which appropriate credit had been given. The judgment underscores the importance of a thorough and meticulous assessment process under the tax laws, emphasizing the need for tax authorities to consider all relevant documents and submissions provided by the taxpayer. By pointing out the respondent's oversight in neglecting crucial documents submitted by the petitioner, the court intervened to ensure a fair and comprehensive reassessment of the case. The court's decision to set aside the original order and direct a fresh assessment underscores the principle of due process and the significance of a holistic review of all pertinent information in tax assessment proceedings.
|
