2017 (7) TMI 506 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Validity of assessment order - rejection of application u/s 84 of the TNVAT Act, 2006 - petitioner have not filed monthly returns and not reported the transactions, which were reflected in the audit slips - Held that - Till date, none of these Authorities have initiated any action in respect of the huge transactions, having effected in the Bank accounts standing in the name of the petitioner. Therefore, it may be true that the audit could give a cause to commence the proceedings, but before issuing a show cause notice to the dealer, the Assessing Officer should have sufficient material to connect the petitioner to that of the transactions, especially, in the light of the stand taken by the petitioner in the Petitions for rectification - the case on hand is being a very peculiar case, this Court is inclined to mould the relief, sought for by the petitioner - matters are remanded to the first respondent at the stage of the SCN - appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to rejection of applications under Section 84 of TNVAT Act based on audit slips indicating high-value transactions and subsequent ex parte assessment.

Analysis:
The petitioner, a registered dealer under TNVAT Act, challenged orders rejecting applications under Section 84 based on audit slips indicating high-value transactions. The audit slips prompted notices to the petitioner for not filing returns, leading to ex parte assessments for 2010-11 and 2011-12. The petitioner claimed innocence, alleging misuse of their details by a third party. Despite seeking information under RTI and approaching various authorities, the first respondent rejected the applications, citing lack of jurisdiction to conduct further enquiries.

Upon review, the court found that the assessment was solely based on the audit slips without substantial evidence linking the petitioner to the transactions. The court emphasized the need for a detailed enquiry before initiating proceedings, especially considering the petitioner's assertions and efforts to prove innocence. It directed the first respondent to conduct necessary enquiries with Customs Department, Income Tax Department, and specific banks where transactions occurred.

In a peculiar case, the court allowed the writ petitions, setting aside the impugned orders and ex parte assessments. The matters were remanded to the first respondent for necessary enquiries and issuance of fresh show cause notices based on the information gathered. The second respondent was directed to disclose information upon request. The court's decision aimed to ensure a fair and thorough investigation before proceeding with the assessment, considering the unique circumstances of the case.