2016 (5) TMI 984 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Applicability of Section 50 of the GVAT Act, 2003 - Movement of goods post-delivery to the CSA - Liability of tax - Tax already deposited under protest and CSAs have also sought further installments to pay such amount - Held that - the respondents shall provide all the books of account to the petitioners as well as any of the hard-disks seized by them to enable the petitioners to respond to any of the queries raised by the Value Added Tax Department. No coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioners like provisional attachment or recovery till the finalization of all the assessments and till the statutory time limit for such payment post passing of such assessment orders has elapsed. In case the assessments are made beyond the statutory limits as per section 34 of the GVAT Act, the rights of the petitioners to challenge any of the proceedings on the ground of jurisdiction or limitation shall be left open. - Petition disposed of

Summary

Issues involved:
1. Applicability of section 50 of the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003 to the petitioner.
2. Provision of books of account and hard disks seized by the respondents to the petitioners.
3. Prohibition of coercive steps against the petitioners until finalization of assessments.
4. Assessment for past years in accordance with the law.
5. Cooperation of petitioners with Assessing Officer in furnishing required information.

Analysis:

1. The petitioners contended that section 50 of the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003 should not be applicable to them as there was no tax evasion alleged on the consignment sales within the State of Gujarat. They argued that the liability under section 50 does not include interest and penalty, and since tax was already deposited under protest, if the CSAs pay the amount, the petitioners' liability for tax would be absolved, and the amount refunded. The Assessing Officer was directed to consider these contentions while framing the assessment.

2. The respondents were ordered to provide all books of account and seized hard disks to the petitioners to enable them to respond to queries raised by the Value Added Tax Department, ensuring transparency and fairness in the assessment process.

3. The court prohibited any coercive steps against the petitioners, such as provisional attachment or recovery, until the finalization of assessments and expiration of the statutory time limit for payment post assessment. The petitioners were granted the right to challenge any proceedings beyond statutory limits on grounds of jurisdiction or limitation.

4. Assessments for past years were to be conducted in accordance with the law, ensuring that all relevant legal provisions and procedures were followed to determine the tax liabilities of the petitioners for previous periods.

5. The petitioners were required to cooperate with the Assessing Officer in furnishing any information requested in pending proceedings, emphasizing the importance of transparency and cooperation in the assessment process to facilitate a fair and accurate determination of tax liabilities.

The petition was disposed of accordingly, with notice discharged and no order as to costs, indicating the resolution of the issues raised by the parties in the case.