2019 (7) TMI 1397 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Validity of assessment order - case of the writ petitioner is that the Assessing Officer concerned was transferred and the new incumbent has passed the impugned Assessment Orders without verifying whether there was a deviation proposal sent by his predecessor - HELD THAT - There is no reference to the aforementioned deviation proposal in the impugned orders. Besides this, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of instant case, this Court is of the view that it may be appropriate to direct the sole respondent to give an opportunity of personal hearing - this view is taken owing to the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case and this Court does not express any view or opinion as to whether personal hearing is necessary in all and every case when it is not made statutorily imperative. The impugned orders are not set aside, but they are given the character and colour of further revisional notices for the purpose of facilitating a Denovo revisional assessment. Though obvious, it is made clear that this course is being adopted without expressing any opinion or view on merits of the matter - Writ petitioners, shall pay 15% of the disputed tax tax liability alone excluding penalty within a fortnight from the date of receipt of this order.

Summary

Issues:
- Whether a deviation proposal was sent by the predecessor of the incumbent officer who passed the impugned orders.
- Treatment of impugned assessment orders.
- Payment of disputed tax by the writ petitioners.
- Conducting a personal hearing for the writ petitioners.
- Consideration of objections in light of the deviation proposal.
- Redoing the revised assessment and passing revised assessment orders.

Analysis:
1. Deviation Proposal: The central issue in the judgment revolved around whether a deviation proposal was sent by the predecessor of the officer who passed the impugned orders. The court noted that the files revealed the existence of such a proposal. Despite intra-office communication details not being disclosed, the court found it sufficient to establish that a deviation proposal existed, impacting the assessment process.

2. Treatment of Assessment Orders: The court decided not to set aside the impugned assessment orders but treated them as further revisional notices. This decision aimed to facilitate a Denovo revisional assessment without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter. The orders were to be revised within a specified timeframe following the outlined procedure.

3. Payment of Disputed Tax: Writ petitioners were directed to pay 15% of the disputed tax within a specific timeframe. This payment was required to be made excluding any penalty amounts. Failure to comply with this directive could result in the impugned orders being treated as revised assessment orders without further reference to the court.

4. Conducting Personal Hearing: Upon payment of the disputed tax, the respondent was instructed to schedule a personal hearing for the writ petitioners within a fortnight. The purpose of this hearing was to consider objections in light of the deviation proposal and to facilitate a fair and thorough assessment process.

5. Consideration of Objections: The court emphasized that all objections raised by the writ petitioners should be considered in the context of the deviation proposal sent by the predecessor officer. This direction aimed to ensure a comprehensive review of the assessment process, taking into account all relevant factors and submissions made by the petitioners.

6. Redoing Revised Assessment: Following the personal hearing and consideration of objections, the respondent was mandated to redo the revised assessment Denovo. The revised assessment orders were to be passed expeditiously, within twelve weeks from the date of the personal hearing, incorporating the findings from the hearing and the deviation proposal.

In conclusion, the judgment provided a detailed framework for addressing the issues raised in the writ petitions, ensuring a fair and thorough assessment process while maintaining procedural integrity and adherence to statutory requirements under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006.