9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (9) TMI 1168 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxValidity of assessment proceedings - petitioner contended that the rate of tax adopted in the assessment orders is erroneous as the notification dated 05.03.1997 read with notification dated 07.04.1998 issued under Section 8(5) and Section 17 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 were not taken into consideration - Held that - what was required to be done by the assessing officer is to consider the petition filed by the petitioner under Section 55 of the Act, examining as to whether the notification sought to be relied upon is applicable to the case of the petitioner and whether there is any error apparent on the face of the record. The scope of powers under Section 55 of the TNGST Act is not to review an order passed by it and the requirement being that the error should be apparent on the face of the record to be rectified. The writ petitions are allowed and the impugned orders are set aside and the matters are remanded back to the respondent for fresh consideration - petition allowed by way of remand.
Issues:
Challenge to assessment orders under Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 and Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 for the years 1998-99,1999-00. Rectification petition under Section 55 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959. Arbitrary rejection of rectification petition by the respondent. Violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Analysis: The petitioner challenged assessment orders under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, and Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 for the years 1998-99, 1999-00. Earlier, writ petitions were filed challenging assessment proceedings dated 31.12.2004, and a conditional order of stay was passed directing the petitioner to pay tax at the rate of 2% within six weeks. Subsequently, the petitioner filed writ appeals against the interim order and applied for rectification of assessment contending errors in the tax rate adopted. The Hon'ble First Bench disposed of the writ appeals and petitions by directing the concerned authority to decide the rectification petition within three weeks. The court emphasized that the assessing officer should consider the petitioner's petition under Section 55 of the Act to rectify any apparent errors. The scope of powers under Section 55 is to rectify errors that are evident on the face of the record, not to review the order passed. The respondent, however, rejected the rectification petition arbitrarily in a single line without proper reasoning, despite specific directions from the Hon'ble First Bench. This arbitrary decision-making process was deemed erroneous, irrational, and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The High Court found this as a sufficient ground to interfere with the impugned order, setting it aside and remanding the matters back to the respondent for fresh consideration. The High Court allowed the writ petitions, directing the respondent to consider the petitioner's rectification application, provide a personal hearing, and pass orders on merits and in accordance with the law. No costs were awarded, and the connected miscellaneous petitions were closed. Additionally, any payments made by the petitioner as per the interim stay order were to abide by the orders to be passed by the respondent in accordance with the court's directions.
|
