2017 (12) TMI 1711 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Principles of natural justice - the petitioner did not respond to the revision notice dated 16.08.2017 - petitioner's case is that they sent a representation dated 20.09.2017 by registered post requesting for time and such representation was received in the office of the respondent on 21.09.2017 as seen from the postal acknowledgement card and the respondent could have granted time - HELD THAT - This Court is of the view that one more opportunity may be granted to the petitioner to go before the Assessing Officer, more so, when the proposed revision of assessment is based upon the materials culled out from the official website of the Department. Such direction would be coupled with certain conditions. Petition allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues involved:
Challenge to impugned order for violation of natural justice under TNVAT Act, 2006.

Analysis:

1. Violation of principles of natural justice:
The petitioner, a registered dealer under the TNVAT Act, challenged an order dated 16.08.2017 for alleged violation of natural justice. The petitioner claimed to have sent a representation dated 20.09.2017 by registered post requesting time, which was received by the respondent on 21.09.2017. The Court noted that the petitioner did not respond to the revision notice dated 16.08.2017. Despite this, the Court opined that the petitioner should be granted another opportunity to appear before the Assessing Officer, especially since the revision of assessment was based on materials from the official website of the Department. The Court directed the petitioner to pay 15% of the tax computed by the respondent for each assessment year (2013-2014, 2015-2016, and 2016-2017) within eight weeks from the date of the order. Failure to comply with this condition would result in the petitioner losing the benefit of the order. The petitioner would then be entitled to treat the assessment orders as show cause notices and submit objections within fifteen days, followed by a personal hearing and reassessment by the respondent.

2. Grant of opportunity to the petitioner:
The Court, while acknowledging the petitioner's failure to respond to the revision notice initially, deemed it appropriate to grant another opportunity for the petitioner to present their case before the Assessing Officer. This decision was influenced by the fact that the revision of assessment was based on information obtained from the official Department website. The Court imposed the condition that the petitioner must pay 15% of the disputed tax within a specified timeline to avail the benefits of the order. Failure to meet this condition would result in the petitioner forfeiting the advantages granted by the Court. The petitioner was instructed to treat the assessment orders as show cause notices upon compliance with the payment condition, allowing them to raise objections within a stipulated period and undergo a reassessment process with a personal hearing provided by the respondent.

3. Disposition of writ petitions:
The Court disposed of the writ petitions by directing the petitioner to pay 15% of the tax as determined by the respondent for the relevant assessment years within eight weeks. Upon timely payment, the petitioner could treat the assessment orders as show cause notices and submit objections within fifteen days, followed by a personal hearing and reassessment by the respondent. The Court emphasized that failure to adhere to the payment condition would result in the petitioner losing the benefits granted by the order. No costs were imposed, and connected miscellaneous petitions were closed as a consequence of the judgment.