2018 (4) TMI 413 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Validity of assessment order - TNVAT Act - pre-revision notices - Held that - In order to consider as to how the assessing officer has proceeded with the matter, the court directed the learned Government Advocate to produce the original files. From a perusal of the original files, it appears that the pre-revision notices have been issued, pursuant to the directions issued by the enforcement, vide communication, dated February 23, 2017. The respondent had no other option except to implement the proposal and that is obviously appears to have been the reason for passing such a cryptic assessment orders - matter remanded back for fresh consideration - petition allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues: Challenge to assessment orders under Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 for the years 2012-13 to 2015-16.

Analysis:
1. Invisible Loss: The assessing officer pointed out four issues in the pre-revision notices, including invisible loss. The petitioner challenged the computation of invisible loss at two percent, citing a previous court decision. The court noted that the respondent did not consider the proper determination of invisible loss as directed by previous court judgments.

2. Mismatch of Details: The petitioner disputed the mismatch of details from the official website, arguing that full details were not provided. The court emphasized the necessity for the assessing officers to furnish complete details to the dealers and conduct a thorough inquiry with all involved parties before making assessments.

3. Discrepancy in Accounts and Discount Issue: The petitioner explained discrepancies in accounts and discount matters, but the respondent rejected their contentions without providing adequate reasons. The court highlighted the importance of the respondent assigning reasons for rejecting contentions raised by the petitioner.

4. Enforcement Officer's Direction: The court observed that the enforcement officer's directive to implement a proposal interfered with the independent powers of the assessing officer. This interference led to cryptic assessment orders, prompting the court to set aside the impugned orders and remand the matters for fresh consideration by the respondent, emphasizing the need for full details, additional objections, personal hearing, and lawful assessments.

In conclusion, the court set aside the assessment orders and remanded the matters back to the respondent for proper consideration, emphasizing the importance of following legal procedures and providing detailed justifications for decisions.