2014 (3) TMI 658 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Tax Liability under the Assam Value Added Tax Act 2003 - Whether Tribunal was justified in dismissing the Assessee s appeal and in turn justified in affirming the order of the assessing authority Whether petitioner was given proper notice and adequate opportunity in the assessment proceedings - Held that - The Assessee being a dealer under the provisions of the Act, she was under obligation to file the return and pay taxes - It was not done by them - Assessee s business of sale of LPG gas was subjected to payment of tax. Assessee was given due show cause notice and she also availed of the same - Nothing prevented her to participate in the assessment proceedings and submit her own documents to show her extent of liability in payment of tax - she did not file any documents in first or second appeal or even in this revision petition to show the error committed in the impugned assessment - the Revenue rightly made best judgment assessment on the basis of documents/material collected by the raiding party from the assessee s business premises - Petition dismissed Decided against assessee.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to validity of order dated 06.01.2014 passed by the Assam Board of Revenue, Guwahati, District Kamrup (Metro) Assam in Case No. STA 21 of 2011.
Dismissal of appeal filed by the petitioner against the appellate order dated 31.3.2011 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Taxes, Guwahati, Zone -A.
Assessment order dated 10.05.2010 passed by the Superintendent of Taxes Unit - D, Kar Bhawan, Dispur, Guwahati, District Kamrup (Metro) Assam.
Validity of Tribunal's decision in dismissing the petitioner's appeal and affirming the assessment order of the assessing authority.

Analysis:
The revision petition challenges the order dismissing the petitioner's appeal against the assessment order passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Taxes. The Tribunal affirmed the assessing authority's order, leading to the question of whether the Tribunal was justified in its decision. The Tribunal's order highlighted the lack of a valid registration under the Assam Value Added Tax Act by the petitioner, resulting in an inspection and subsequent tax imposition based on seized books of accounts. The Deputy Commissioner waived penalty and interest, leaving only the tax amount due. The Tribunal emphasized that the petitioner's failure to respond to notices and lack of registration undermined her challenge to the assessment order.

The judgment further delves into the petitioner's obligations under the Assam Value Added Tax Act, emphasizing the requirement to file returns and pay taxes, which the petitioner failed to do. The business activities of the petitioner, involving the sale of LPG gas, subjected her to tax liability, a fact not disputed by the petitioner. The necessity of a raid to determine tax liability due to the petitioner's non-compliance with filing returns justified the assessing authority's actions, upheld by the appellate courts. The petitioner's argument of lack of notice and opportunity in the assessment proceedings was dismissed, as she had the chance to participate and present evidence but failed to do so, hindering any challenge to the assessment's validity.

The judgment concludes by noting that the assessing authority's decision not to impose interest or penalty on the petitioner's breaches was favorable, as the State did not contest this aspect. The court found no merit in the revision petition, dismissing it without costs. The judgment highlights the importance of complying with tax regulations, participating in assessment proceedings, and providing evidence to challenge tax liabilities effectively.