2021 (1) TMI 1311 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Validity of reassessment orders at Anenxures-A1 A2 and A3 - seeking for quashing the demand notices at AnenxuresB1 B2 and B3 issued pursuant to the orders at AnenxuresA1 A2 and A3 - HELD THAT - Having perused the endorsements which are not speaking orders and also deeming it necessary that the petitioner be afforded an opportunity of personal hearing before any orders are passed under Anenxures-N1 N2 and N3 endorsements at Anenxures-C1 C2 and C3 are set aside and the matters are remitted for fresh consideration on Anenxures-N1 N2 and N3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that an appeal would be filed as against the reassessment orders at Anenxures-A1 A2 and A3. However till the disposal of the rectification applications at Anenxures-N1 N2 and N3 the respondent - Authority not to precipitate the demands raised as per the impugned demand notices at AnenxuresB1 B2 and B3. Petition disposed off

Summary

Issues involved:
Challenge to reassessment orders, quashing of demand notices, quashing of endorsements, rectification applications under Section 69(1) of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, passing of endorsements without hearing, setting aside of endorsements, remittance for fresh consideration, appeal against reassessment orders, stay on demands raised in demand notices.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged reassessment orders and sought to quash demand notices and endorsements related to the orders. The petitioner contended that applications for rectification of reassessment orders were made without a hearing, and the explanations provided were not considered. The Government Pleader acknowledged that the endorsements were passed without a hearing.

Upon examining the endorsements and noting their lack of clarity, the court deemed it necessary to grant the petitioner a personal hearing before any further orders were issued. Consequently, the court set aside the endorsements and remitted the matters for fresh consideration regarding the rectification applications.

The petitioner's counsel indicated intent to file an appeal against the reassessment orders. However, the court ordered a stay on the demands raised in the impugned demand notices until the rectification applications were resolved. The court kept the contentions of the parties open for future consideration.

In conclusion, the petition was disposed of in light of the court's decision to set aside the endorsements and allow for a fresh review of the rectification applications.