2018 (2) TMI 988 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Principles of Natural Justice - the respondent did not appreciate the scope of documents produced by the petitioner, though they have admitted that the petitioner has produced 62 invoice copies - Held that - this Court is of the view that the assessment should be redone by considering all the documents and by directing the petitioner to produce all the documents, since the endeavor of the respondent should be to ensure that, correct rate of tax is levied and collected, as the assessment order should not be paper orders. - petition allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to assessment order under TNVAT Act for the assessment years 2014-15 based on violation of principles of natural justice.

Analysis:
The petitioner, a registered dealer under TNVAT Act and CST Act, challenged the assessment order for the years 2014-15 on the grounds of a violation of natural justice principles. The petitioner claimed that the respondent did not properly consider the documents provided, despite admitting the submission of 62 invoice copies. The counter affidavit alleged lack of cooperation from the petitioner in producing bank statements and purchase invoice details to support their claim of conducting job works.

The petitioner, engaged in tailoring and selling readymade garments, contended that they were involved in job works, supported by the production of two sample invoices and a reply affidavit. However, these documents were not presented during the assessment proceedings. The respondent admitted the submission of 62 invoices by the petitioner but claimed lack of cooperation during the assessment. The petitioner refuted this claim in a reply affidavit.

The Court acknowledged the respondent's admission of receiving 62 invoices from the petitioner and directed the respondent to request additional supportive documents from the petitioner to ensure a thorough assessment. Emphasizing the importance of correctly levying taxes and avoiding superficial assessment orders, the Court concluded that the assessment should be redone by considering all documents and directing the petitioner to produce necessary paperwork.

Consequently, the Court allowed the writ petition, set aside the impugned order, and remanded the matter to the respondent for a fresh assessment. The respondent was instructed to schedule a personal hearing with the petitioner, specify the required documents, review the submissions, and conduct the assessment in compliance with the law. No costs were awarded, and the connected Writ Miscellaneous Petition was closed as a result of the judgment.