2014 (8) TMI 577 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Writ petition - Call for records - Held that - Writ petitions are disposed of, directing the third respondent to serve copies of the relevant documents to the petitioner at the cost of the petitioner forthwith, at any rate, within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and the proceedings pursuant to Ext. P14 shall be finalized by the 5th respondent/Fast Track Team, after verifying the records and giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner to produce all the relevant records and to explain the facts and figures, which shall be done within one month thereafter. It is made clear that the petitioner will not be entitled to raise any plea of limitation with regard to the assessment to be finalized as above, on the basis of the actual merit involved - Decided in favour of petitioner.

Summary

Issues:
1. Ext. P14 series notices issued under Section 17 D of the KGST Act
2. Writ petition seeking various reliefs including certiorari, mandamus, and prohibition
3. Opportunity for the petitioner to produce copies of relevant documents before finalization of proceedings
4. Dispute over retention of originals by the department versus providing copies to the petitioner
5. Allegation of protracting proceedings and causing assessment finalization after the period of limitation

Analysis:
1. The petitioner challenged Ext. P14 series notices issued under Section 17 D of the KGST Act. The issue was closely related to a previous writ petition. The prayers in the current petition included seeking a writ of certiorari to quash the notices, mandamus for various directions, and prohibition on further proceedings until certain conditions were met.

2. The Income Tax Department had collected records, but the petitioner sought an opportunity to produce copies of relevant documents before finalizing the proceedings. The court had previously directed the department to provide copies or originals of documents to the petitioner within a specified time for finalization of proceedings.

3. There was a dispute over retaining originals with the department versus providing copies to the petitioner. The petitioner preferred having copies to avoid potential allegations of manipulation. The government pleader accused the petitioner of trying to delay proceedings beyond the limitation period, but the petitioner clarified that they did not intend to raise the plea of limitation.

4. The court directed the department to serve copies of relevant documents to the petitioner within two weeks at the petitioner's cost. The proceedings were to be finalized by the Fast Track Team within one month after giving the petitioner an opportunity to produce all relevant records and explain the facts. The petitioner was barred from raising the plea of limitation regarding the assessment based on the actual merit involved.