2018 (4) TMI 1296 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Validity of assessment order - petitioner s request for furnishing the copies of the seized records, namely, D7 records has been rejected by the Assessing Officer - principles of Natural Justice - Held that - the question of manipulation will not arise if the original records are retained by the second respondent and photocopies are produced to the petitioner. If this procedure had been adopted by the second respondent, this very litigation itself could have been avoided and the correct rate of tax could have been recovered from the petitioner and the matter would not be languishing in the Court for the past ten years. To enable the petitioner to contest the matter on merits, no prejudice would be caused to the revenue if the copies of D7 records recovered from the petitioner s business premises are furnished at the cost of the petitioner. The respondent is directed to furnish the copies of D7 records which were recovered from the petitioner by the enforcement after the petitioner remits the requisite costs for the same - Petition allowed -

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to assessment orders under TNGST Act for judgment assessments, rejection of request for seized records copies, non-cooperation in assessment proceedings, refusal to furnish D7 records, manipulation concerns, delay in litigation resolution.

Analysis:
The petitioner, a registered dealer, challenged assessment orders for 2003-2004 and 2004-2005 under the TNGST Act, which were judgment assessments. The main grievance was the rejection of the petitioner's request for copies of seized D7 records, leading to the challenge in court.

The respondent issued five summons for hearings, but the petitioner failed to appear or cooperate in the assessment proceedings. While the petitioner submitted objections after the hearing dates, the respondent refused to provide copies of D7 records, citing concerns about manipulation. The court disagreed with this reasoning, suggesting that providing photocopies while retaining originals could have avoided the litigation.

The court held that furnishing D7 records to the petitioner at their cost would not prejudice the revenue and would enable a fair contest on merits. Thus, the court directed the respondent to provide the copies of D7 records to the petitioner upon payment, treating the assessment orders as show cause notices for objections submission within fifteen days.

In conclusion, the court disposed of the writ petitions, instructing the respondent to furnish D7 records to the petitioner, who must submit objections within fifteen days of receipt. A personal hearing opportunity was granted for reassessment in compliance with the law, aiming to resolve the matter effectively after a prolonged period of litigation.