2017 (11) TMI 928 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Penalty u/s 24 (3) of the TNGST, 1959 - Revision Petitions have been rejected only on the technical ground that, as against original assessment orders, dated 10.02.2003, the petitioner has not filed any Appeals but has preferred Revision Petitions against the orders passed by the third respondent - Held that - Section 55 of the TNGST Act provides for a remedy for the assessee to approach the Assessing Officer for any rectification. This is precisely what the petitioner/assessee has done on receipt of assessment orders by filing the Petition before the third respondent to issue revised proceedings. It cannot be disputed that, as against an order passed under Section 55 of the TNGST Act, a Revision lies to the second respondent. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled to question the orders passed by the third respondent, dated 20.02.2003, by way of Revision Petition, hence, the impugned orders passed by the second respondent, rejecting the Revision Petitions as not maintainable are incorrect. The matters are remanded back to the second respondent, with a direction to take up the Revision Petitions filed by the petitioner u/s 55 of the TNGST Act - petition allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
Challenging orders affirming penalty under Section 24(3) of TN General Sales Tax Act, 1959 due to technical grounds of not filing appeals against original assessment orders but preferring Revision Petitions against refusal to revise assessment orders under Section 55 of TNGST Act.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged orders affirming penalty under Section 24(3) of the TN General Sales Tax Act, 1959. The Revision Petitions were rejected on the basis that the petitioner did not file appeals against original assessment orders but opted for Revision Petitions against the refusal to revise assessment orders under Section 55 of the TNGST Act. The first and second Revisional Authorities held the Revision Petitions as not maintainable due to this technicality.

The court disagreed with the impugned orders, emphasizing that Section 55 of the TNGST Act allows the assessee to seek rectification from the Assessing Officer. The petitioner had indeed filed a petition before the third respondent for revised proceedings upon receiving assessment orders, correcting a mistake in the turnover calculation. The court noted that a Revision lies against orders under Section 55 of the TNGST Act, enabling the petitioner to challenge the orders of the third respondent through Revision Petitions. Therefore, the rejection of Revision Petitions by the second respondent was deemed incorrect, leading to the incorrectness of the orders by the first respondent as well. Additionally, assessments for certain years were not completed by the third respondent at the relevant time.

Consequently, the court held that the Revision Petitions should be considered on merits. The Writ Petitions were allowed, setting aside the impugned orders and remanding the matters back to the second respondent. The direction was given to reconsider the Revision Petitions filed by the petitioner under Section 55 of the TNGST Act, provide a personal hearing opportunity, and pass fresh orders based on merits and in accordance with the law.