2015 (8) TMI 1467 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Best Judgement Assessment - levy of penalty - appellant failed to respond to SCNs - Form WW rejected - Held that - Tthe appellant is obliged to do under the Act, is to file monthly returns and not really the auditor s report. In any case, after the best of judgment assessment orders are passed, the appellant has filed Form WW. The correctness of the particulars reflected in Form WW are not in question. In such circumstances, the rejection of the request for passing revised assessment orders is not in accordance with law. This aspect has not been properly appreciated in the writ petitions. Once the original defect, if at all it was a defect, was cured by the assessee, by filing Form WW, the respondent cannot simply throw the form out on the ground that it was filed beyond the period of limitation. This is especially so when best of judgment assessment orders have been passed by him. The matter is remitted back to the respondent for taking on file Form WW filed by the appellant in respect of both the assessment years - appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
1. Failure to respond to show cause notices
2. Rejection of request for passing revised assessment orders
3. Interpretation of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006

Issue 1: Failure to respond to show cause notices
The appellant failed to respond to two show cause notices dated 12.11.2014 and 10.2.2015, leading to best of judgment assessment orders being passed on 20.3.2015 and 23.3.2015. The learned Judge dismissed the writ petitions filed by the appellant on the basis of this failure to respond to the show cause notices. The appellant argued that while this may justify the best of judgment assessment orders, it should not automatically lead to the rejection of the request for passing revised assessment orders.

Issue 2: Rejection of request for passing revised assessment orders
Following the best of judgment assessment orders, the appellant filed Form WW along with the auditor's report under Section 63A(1) of the Act. However, the Assessing Officer rejected this request on the grounds that Form WW was filed beyond the 30-day period from the receipt of the assessment orders. The High Court found that the rejection of the request for revised assessment orders was not in accordance with the law, especially when the correctness of the particulars in Form WW was not in question.

Issue 3: Interpretation of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006
The High Court analyzed the scheme of the Act, emphasizing that the appellant's obligation was to file monthly returns and not solely the auditor's report. The Court noted that once the appellant filed Form WW after the best of judgment assessment orders were passed, and the particulars in the form were correct, the rejection of the request for revised assessment orders was unjustified. The Court held that once the original defect was cured by the appellant, the Assessing Officer could not reject the form based solely on the timing of its submission.

In conclusion, the High Court allowed the writ appeals, setting aside the common order of the learned Judge and the order rejecting the request for revised assessment orders. The matter was remitted back to the respondent for accepting Form WW filed by the appellant and passing fresh orders. The Court directed the respondent to accept Form WW and proceed accordingly since the appellant had already paid the penalty. The judgment closed the matter without imposing any costs on either party.