Home Case Index All Cases VAT and Sales Tax VAT and Sales Tax + HC VAT and Sales Tax - 2015 (8) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (8) TMI 153 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxValidity of assessment order passed under APVAT - Authority of Assessing Officer - authorisation in Form ADM-1C with unique number through VATIS only. - Held that - It is necessary to notice Circular dated 05.11.2012 wherein it is categorically stated that Any authorisation (ADM-1C) issued outside VATIS or without unique number shall not be a valid authorisation for Assessment. Further, this aspect is further clarified by the Circular dated 27.08.2012 wherein the Commissioner had stated that Effective from 1.9.2012, all the Deputy Commissioners concerned and Additional Commissioner/Joint Commissioner, Enforcement shall issue Audit authorisations in Form ADM-1B with Unique No.through VATIS only. Any authorisation (ADM 1B) issued outside VATIS or without unique No.shall not be a valid authorisation for audit/assessment. Any officer conducting audit/assessment without valid authorisation shall be liable for disciplinary action. - Further reading of the Circular leaves no manner of doubt that the effort of the higher authorities is to create definite system generated methodology to avoid the allegations of the arbitrariness - there being admitted violation of the procedure prescribed by the authorities themselves, the assessment order passed is set aside - Decided in favour of assessee.
Issues:
Challenge to assessment order due to lack of proper authorization under Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2005 and Rules. Analysis: The judgment primarily revolves around the challenge to an assessment order dated 23.05.2013 on the grounds of improper authorization by the Assessing Officer. The appellant contended that the Assessing Officer did not have the requisite authorization as mandated by the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2005 and related circulars. The circulars issued by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes on 27.08.2012 and 05.11.2012 were crucial in this regard. These circulars specified that authorization for assessment must be in Form ADM-1C with a unique number generated through VATIS to prevent arbitrary exercise of power. The respondent produced an authorization purportedly given to the Assessing Officer/Deputy Commissioner, (CT), Narasaraopet Division at Guntur, which lacked the mandatory unique number as required by the circulars. The manual generation of authorization was in clear violation of the prescribed procedure outlined in the circulars. The judgment delves into the specifics of the circulars, emphasizing the significance of the unique number in authorizations for assessment. It is highlighted that any authorization issued outside VATIS or lacking a unique number would not be considered valid for assessment, as explicitly stated in the Circular dated 05.11.2012. The Circular dated 27.08.2012 further reinforced the requirement for a unique number in authorizations issued by Deputy Commissioners and Additional Commissioner/Joint Commissioner, Enforcement through VATIS. The purpose behind these circulars was to establish a systematic and non-arbitrary approach to assessment procedures, thereby avoiding allegations of arbitrariness in assessments. In light of the clear violation of the prescribed procedure by using a manually generated authorization lacking a unique number, the assessment order was set aside by the Court. However, the respondents were granted liberty to initiate proceedings, following due process, to address any escaped turnover. The writ petition was allowed, and any related miscellaneous petitions were closed without costs being imposed. The judgment underscores the importance of adherence to procedural requirements and the need for systematic, non-arbitrary methodologies in tax assessment processes to uphold fairness and prevent unauthorized actions.
|