2018 (12) TMI 1900 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Revision of assessment - cross-examination of other end dealers - Section 81 of the TNVAT Act, 2006 - HELD THAT - When the petitioner's concluded assessment is sought to be revised on the strength of the returns filed by the other end dealer and the petitioner wants to cross examine the other end dealer also, it is the duty of the assessing officer to make him available. Section 81 of the TNVAT Act, 2006 confers all the powers conferred on a court by the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, for the purpose of summoning and enforcing the attendance of any person and examining him on oath or affirmation; and compelling the production of any document. Section 81 of the TNVAT Act, 2006 does not merely confer a power. It is coupled with a duty also. In this case, the respondent miserably failed to exercise the said statutory power given to him. The assessing officer ought to have done a cross verification with the other end dealer and also made an enquiry with the other end dealer. The matter is remitted to the file of the respondent to pass orders afresh in accordance with law - Petition allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
Assessment year 2011-12 - Revision notice under Section 27 of TNVAT Act, 2006 - Demand for documents and cross-examination - Rejection of petitioner's stand - Compliance with statutory powers and duties - Non-adherence to parameters set by Madras High Court.

Analysis:
The petitioner, an assessee registered with the respondent, received a revision notice under Section 27 of the TNVAT Act, 2006 for the assessment year 2011-12. The petitioner requested copies of specific documents, including sale bill copies, records related to the mode of supply, and records concerning payment for deliveries, along with the opportunity to cross-examine individuals influencing the liability. Despite the petitioner's demands, only the sale bill copies were provided, and the other requested records were withheld. Additionally, the respondent did not facilitate the cross-examination of the other end dealer as requested by the petitioner. The petitioner challenged the impugned order in this writ petition.

During the hearing, the court noted that the respondent failed to provide the petitioner with the complete set of documents requested, limiting the information to only the sale bill copies. The court emphasized that when a concluded assessment is being revised based on returns filed by another party, and the assessee requests to cross-examine that party, it is the duty of the assessing officer to facilitate such cross-examination. Section 81 of the TNVAT Act, 2006 grants the power to summon individuals and compel document production, imposing a corresponding duty on the assessing officer. In this case, the respondent did not fulfill this duty, neglecting to conduct a proper cross-verification and enquiry with the other end dealer.

Furthermore, the court pointed out that the respondent did not adhere to the guidelines established by the Madras High Court in a previous decision. Citing the failure to follow the parameters set by the Madras High Court, the court quashed the impugned order in the writ petition and remitted the matter back to the respondent for fresh orders in compliance with the law. The court ruled in favor of the petitioner, allowing the writ petition without costs and closing the connected miscellaneous petition.