2019 (7) TMI 1874 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Principles of natural justice - validity of assessment order - objections of the writ petitioner have been rejected summarily in one sentence without giving any reason as to why and how the objections are rejected - HELD THAT - A perusal of the impugned order reveals that the Assessing authority i.e. sole respondent has merely gone by the proposal given by the Enforcement Wing of the department. With regard to the detailed objections of the writ petitioner in a cryptic manner the Assessing authority has rejected the same without giving any reason as to why and how the same are rejected. The objections of the writ petitioner dealer have hardly been considered though this is a case of mismatch. What is of utmost importance is proposals of the Enforcement Wing have been confirmed without an independent assessment. The impugned assessment order is set aside - respondent is directed to assess afresh after giving a personal hearing to the petitioner s duly authorized representative and after giving opportunity to the petitioner to file requisite records and documents - petition allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
Assessment order challenged on grounds of lack of independent assessment and summary rejection of objections without reasons.

Analysis:
The judgment concerns a writ petition challenging an assessment order for the assessment year 2014-2015. The petitioner, engaged in the business of 'Utensils,' was assessed based on a self-assessment without the examination of books by the respondent. Subsequently, the Enforcement Wing authorities inspected the business premises, leading to proposals for tax demand. The respondent issued a revisional notice based on these proposals, which the petitioner objected to, requesting time to respond. Despite granting time, the respondent passed the assessment order, prompting the petitioner to challenge it primarily on the grounds of summarily rejecting objections without reasons and failing to conduct an independent assessment. The petitioner argued that an assessment independent of the Enforcement Wing proposal is necessary, citing the 'Narasus Roller' judgment and the 'Madras Granites Case,' emphasizing the quasi-judicial nature of the assessing officer's role.

The court referred to the 'Narasus Roller' judgment, which highlighted the assessing officer's duty to exercise independent judgment and not be solely guided by higher authorities' proposals. The court set aside the impugned orders in 'Narasus Roller' and directed fresh assessment, cautioning against reliance solely on Enforcement Wing proposals. In the present case, the court found that the assessing authority had merely followed the Enforcement Wing's proposals, disregarding the petitioner's detailed objections without proper consideration. The court reiterated the importance of conducting an independent assessment and granted specific directions for reassessment, emphasizing compliance with the 'Narasus Principle.'

Consequently, the court ordered the setting aside of the impugned assessment order and directed the respondent to conduct a fresh assessment. The respondent was instructed to provide a personal hearing to the petitioner's representative, allow the submission of necessary records, and conduct the assessment independently of the Enforcement Wing proposals, in line with the 'Narasus Principle.' The court mandated the completion of the reassessment within eight weeks from the date of the order. The writ petition was disposed of accordingly, with no costs awarded, and the connected miscellaneous petition was closed.