2021 (11) TMI 1036 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Validity of assessment order - impugned orders challenged on the ground that the impugned orders are contrary to law and without consideration of the reply filed by the petitioner - violation of principles of natural justice - HELD THAT - It is noticed that notice dated 13.07.2021 was issued to the petitioner and fixed a personal hearing. It was served on the petitioner on 15.07.2021. However, the petitioner did not participate in the hearing before the respondent. Since the petitioner has shown no interest in participating before the respondent, there is no merits in the present writ petitions - That apart, the impugned order is dated 09.08.2021. There is also no explanation forthcoming as to why the petitioner did not choose to file a writ petition on an earlier occasion and why the petitioner has chosen now to approach this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. There is no explanation as to why the petitioner did not participate in the hearing before the respondent in the affidavit filed in support of the present writ petition. The petitioner is given liberty to workout the remedy before the Appellate Commissioner by filing an appeal within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order - Petition dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to impugned orders dated 09.08.2021 for Assessment Year 2013-2014; Failure to participate in the hearing before the respondent; Maintainability of the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged the impugned orders dated 09.08.2021, alleging they were contrary to law and failed to consider the petitioner's reply to a notice dated 06.10.2017 for the Assessment Year 2013-2014. The impugned orders mentioned a notice of personal hearing issued to the petitioner for 19.07.2021, but the petitioner did not participate in the hearing. Consequently, the court found no merit in the writ petitions due to the petitioner's lack of interest in engaging with the respondent.

The court noted that the petitioner did not provide any explanation for not filing a writ petition earlier or for approaching the court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India at that particular time. Additionally, the petitioner failed to explain the absence from the hearing before the respondent in the affidavit supporting the writ petition. Despite the petitioner citing a precedent to argue against the impugned order, the court deemed the writ petition not maintainable as the petitioner did not file any representation or appear before the respondent.

As a result, the court dismissed the writ petitions, granting the petitioner the liberty to appeal before the Appellate Commissioner within thirty days from receiving a copy of the order. The Appellate Commissioner was instructed to consider the petitioner's case on merits and issue a speaking order within three months if an appeal is filed within the stipulated time. The petitioner was also required to pre-deposit the necessary amounts under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 for the appeal to be entertained.

Furthermore, the Appellate Commissioner was directed to consider Circular No.05 of 2021 issued by the Commercial Tax Department, Tamil Nadu, and to provide the petitioner with a personal hearing either in person or through video conferencing before issuing the final order. The judgment concluded by stating that no costs were to be imposed, and all connected Writ Miscellaneous Petitions were closed.