2019 (9) TMI 1084 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Finalization of revised assessment - Section 25(1) of the KVAT Act - it was alleged that the impugned proceedings were finalised without affording the appellant an opportunity of personal hearing, after filing of objections to the proposal notices - HELD THAT - We make it clear that the direction contained in the impugned judgment to the Assessing Authority to complete the assessment, need not be taken as a positive direction to the authority to re-open the assessment and to make fresh assessment against the appellant. Since the matter is remanded with direction to afford opportunity for personal hearing, it is for the Assessing Authority to decide the mater on its merits, after taking into consideration of the objections filed as well as the documents if any produced, and also after taking note of the settled legal position on the points agitated. Appeal disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
1. Challenge against the revised assessment under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act for the years 2011-12 to 2015-16.
2. Whether the appellant was denied the opportunity of personal hearing in the assessment proceedings.
3. Whether the writ petitions can be entertained on the merits of the impugned assessment orders.
4. Direction to the Assessing Authority to complete the assessment process.
5. Compliance with the directions of the Single Judge regarding personal hearing.

Analysis:
1. The judgment concerns the challenge against the revised assessment under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act for the years 2011-12 to 2015-16. The Single Judge found that the assessments were finalized without affording the appellant an opportunity of personal hearing after objections were filed. The Single Judge set aside the assessments and directed the Assessing Authority to reconsider the matter after providing a personal hearing to the appellant.

2. The appellant contended that the Single Judge should have considered the grounds raised against the sustainability of the assessment orders on their merits. The Government Pleader argued that the court cannot entertain the petitions on the merits as statutory appeals were available. However, the High Court held that the question of assessment against the appellant should be decided by the Assessing Authority after a personal hearing, as directed by the Single Judge. The court allowed the grounds raised in the writ petitions to be agitated before the Appellate Authority.

3. The High Court concluded that there was no basis to interfere with the Single Judge's judgment, emphasizing that the Assessing Authority should decide the matter on its merits after considering objections and legal positions. The court clarified that the direction to complete the assessment did not mandate re-opening the assessment but required a fair consideration of all aspects.

4. Regarding compliance with the Single Judge's directions for a personal hearing, the appellant had already appeared before the Assessing Authority. However, the High Court deemed it appropriate to grant a further opportunity for a hearing, restraining the Authority from passing orders based on the previous hearing. The court instructed the Authority to conduct a new hearing and make decisions promptly.

5. In conclusion, the writ appeals were disposed of accordingly, emphasizing the importance of providing a fair opportunity for a personal hearing and ensuring a proper reconsideration of the assessment process by the Assessing Authority.