2018 (2) TMI 1166 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Principles of Natural Justice - revision of assessment under Section 22(4) of the Act - Held that - considering the conduct of the petitioner in dragging the matter without offering proper explanation, it is held that the instant case is not a case where there is violation of principles of natural justice or violation of provisions under Section 22(4) of the Act, but it is the case where the petitioner filed to avail the opportunity granted to them - the petitioner should submit a proper reply duly supported by records. However, only one opportunity will be given to the petitioner, failing which, the respondent can proceed to recover the tax as quantified in the impugned order - petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to assessment order, opportunity of personal hearing under Section 22(4) of the Act, violation of principles of natural justice, submission of objections, conduct of petitioner, granting of one opportunity to submit records, sufficiency of details provided by respondent, consequences of failure to comply with directions.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged the assessment order passed by the respondent, seeking a direction to furnish details for submitting objections regarding alleged tax evasion during the assessment year 2008-2009. The Court had earlier directed the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation and provide necessary documents. Despite being granted time, the petitioner failed to submit objections, leading to the completion of assessment by the respondent.

The petitioner contended that even without objections, a personal hearing should have been provided under Section 22(4) of the Act. Citing a previous case, the petitioner argued for the benefit of a decision, emphasizing the conduct of the petitioner in requesting documents and subsequent failure to respond. The respondent had provided details of the petitioner's import transactions, indicating regular importation of timber, except for the disputed year. The onus to prove the absence of transactions fell on the petitioner, who failed to do so within the stipulated time, resulting in the assessment being completed.

The Court observed that the petitioner's delay and lack of proper explanation did not amount to a violation of natural justice or statutory provisions. However, considering the petitioner's claim of health issues affecting the submission of objections, the Court granted one opportunity to provide supporting records. The Court deemed the details provided by the respondent sufficient and instructed the petitioner to respond with a comprehensive reply supported by records within a specified timeframe. Failure to comply would empower the respondent to recover the tax as per the assessment order.

In conclusion, the Court directed the petitioner to treat the proceedings as a show cause notice and submit a detailed response with documents within thirty days. Non-compliance would allow the respondent to proceed further based on the assessment order. Conversely, if the petitioner adhered to the directions, the respondent would evaluate the objections in accordance with the law. The judgment did not impose any costs, and related petitions were closed accordingly.