2016 (9) TMI 1378 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Natural Justice - validity of assessment order - petitioner s case is that they have not provided with adequate opportunity to submit their objections - Held that - It cannot be disputed that but for the surprise inspection conducted, the alleged suppression would have given unnoticed. Therefore, the respondent was justified in issuing a show cause notice to the petitioner proposing to revise the assessment - However, the respondent could have granted 15 days time to the petitioner instead of five days as five days is a very short period for the petitioner to submit their objections, especially in cases where it is a revision of assessment. This Court would direct the petitioner to treat the impugned proceedings as a show cause notice and submit their objection within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order - petition allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues Involved:
Challenge to assessment order under Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 for the year 2013-2014. Adequacy of opportunity to submit objections. Time granted for submitting objections.

Analysis:

1. Challenge to Assessment Order: The petitioner, a registered dealer, contested the assessment order under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 for the year 2013-2014. The petitioner argued that they were not given sufficient opportunity to present their objections. The court acknowledged the necessity of the show cause notice issued by the respondent due to alleged suppression that would have gone unnoticed without a surprise inspection.

2. Adequacy of Opportunity: The court recognized the importance of providing a reasonable opportunity for the petitioner to respond adequately. It was noted that the respondent could have allowed a longer period for the petitioner to submit objections, especially in cases involving a revision of assessment. The court deemed five days as insufficient and directed the petitioner to treat the proceedings as a show cause notice and submit objections within 15 days from the date of receiving the court's order.

3. Time Granted for Submitting Objections: In light of the above considerations, the court directed the respondent to re-do the assessment after the petitioner submits their objections within the extended timeframe. The court emphasized the significance of affording a personal hearing and duly considering the objections raised by the petitioner in the reassessment process.

4. Disposition: The court concluded by disposing of the writ petition with the aforementioned directions, without imposing any costs on either party. The connected Miscellaneous Petition was also closed as a result of the judgment.

This judgment highlights the importance of providing adequate opportunity for parties to present their case, especially in matters of tax assessment, and underscores the principles of natural justice in administrative proceedings.