2017 (6) TMI 609 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Natural justice - validity of assessment order - case of petitioner is that when the impugned order of assessment was made based on the Web Report, the Assessing Authority is not justified in passing the impugned order of assessment, without furnishing the details of such report and without conducting any enquiry at all levels - Held that - the assessment order cannot be passed in such a manner - the matter is remitted back to the Assessing Authority to redo the assessment after following the procedures/ directions issued by this Court - petition allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge against assessment order based on web report without detailed information and enquiry.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged the assessment order dated 13.04.2017 for the assessment year 2014-2015, contending that the Assessing Authority did not provide details of the web report or conduct any enquiry before passing the order. The petitioner argued that a centralized mechanism should be adopted to handle cases of mismatch, citing a previous decision by the Court in a similar matter. The learned Additional Government Pleader acknowledged that the issue was covered by the previous decision and agreed that a similar order could be passed in this case as well.

The Court referred to the previous decision which emphasized the need for a centralized mechanism to address discrepancies, preventing a multitude of proceedings and safeguarding revenue interests. The Court directed the Principal Secretary and Commissioner of Commercial Taxes to establish detailed procedures for handling mismatch cases, involving a central mechanism for thorough examination before issuing notices or orders. The Court allowed the writ petition, setting aside the impugned assessment order and remitting the matter back to the Assessing Authority to conduct a fresh assessment following the guidelines provided in the previous decision. The Assessing Authority was instructed to afford the petitioner a personal hearing before finalizing the assessment within eight weeks from the date of the order.

In conclusion, the Court granted relief to the petitioner, highlighting the necessity for a centralized mechanism to address discrepancies in assessment procedures, ensuring fairness and efficiency in dealing with such cases.