2017 (12) TMI 755 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Revision of assessment - Section 27 of the TNVAT Act - Held that - the petitioner is directed to pay 15% of the disputed tax within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If the petitioner complies with the condition, then, along with the payment, the petitioner is entitled to submit his objections by treating the impugned proceedings as a SCN - the respondent shall afford an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner and redo the assessment in accordance with law, after considering all issues pointed out by the petitioner - petition allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to assessment order for the year 2009-2010 under TNVAT Act, 2006.
Consideration of total taxable turnover and levy of penalty.
Non-production of purchase bills affecting Input Tax Credit (ITC) claim.
Opportunity for petitioner to submit materials before Assessing Officer.

Analysis:
The petitioner, a registered dealer under TNVAT Act, challenged the assessment order for 2009-2010 due to defects found during a surprise inspection in 2010. The department proposed to revise the assessment and re-determine the total taxable turnover, along with levying a penalty. The impugned order highlighted that the petitioner's turnover exceeded ?50 lakhs in the previous year, and ITC was not considered as purchase bills were not produced during inspection. The question arose whether the return filed by the petitioner was a revised one, which the department contended should have been filed earlier. The court left this issue open for further adjudication.

The petitioner argued that they were not informed about the necessity of producing purchase bills for claiming relief. Consequently, the court granted the petitioner another opportunity to present all relevant materials before the Assessing Officer. As a condition, the petitioner was directed to pay 15% of the disputed tax within four weeks. Upon compliance, the petitioner could submit objections, treating the proceedings as a show cause notice. The respondent was required to provide a personal hearing to the petitioner and redo the assessment considering all raised issues. Failure to meet the condition would nullify the benefits of the order, allowing the respondent to proceed as per the law.

In conclusion, the court disposed of the Writ Petition with the direction for the petitioner to fulfill the specified condition within the stipulated time. No costs were imposed, and connected Miscellaneous Petitions were closed as a result of the judgment.