2020 (4) TMI 236 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Imposition of penalty - Appealable order u/s 67 of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act - principles of natural justice - HELD THAT - The references in the assessment order to the opportunity of hearing on 23.4.2018, 10.5.2018 and 31.01.2019, the submission of the petitioner cannot be even suggested for the reason that the notices are dated 18.12.2018. The aforementioned arguments are not able to cut ice in view of the reference as it was pertaining to the opportunity given after issuance of notice dated 10.4.2018 for production of books of accounts and the date of opportunity of hearing was after the notice dated 18.12.2018. There are no justification in this writ petition to bring the matter within the realm of judicial review to form an opinion that the principles of natural justice were flouted - petition dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
Assessment orders appealable under Section 67 of Kerala Value Added Tax Act challenged for lack of conformity with principles of natural justice.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged assessment orders for the 3rd and 4th quarters of 2015-2016 and 2016-2017, citing lack of conformity with natural justice principles in the penalty proposals. The petitioner argued that the notices for penalty did not align with the opportunity of hearing provided. However, the court noted that notices were issued in April 2018 for production of accounts, with subsequent opportunities for hearing in 2019. The court highlighted the dates of notices and hearings, emphasizing that the petitioner's arguments did not hold as the opportunities for hearing were after the issuance of notices. The court referenced the content of the notices under Section 67(1)(c) of the KVAT Act 2003, outlining the non-filing of statutory returns and non-payment of taxes, with provisions for objections and a personal hearing opportunity. Despite the petitioner's claims, the court found no grounds for judicial review based on the principles of natural justice.

The court dismissed the writ petition, concluding that there was no merit in the petitioner's arguments to warrant judicial review based on the alleged violation of natural justice principles. The judgment upheld the validity of the assessment orders and rejected the petitioner's challenge regarding the penalty proposals. The court's decision was based on the timeline of notices, opportunities for hearing, and the content of the communication between the parties. The dismissal of the writ petition signifies the court's determination that the assessment process adhered to the necessary legal procedures and did not infringe upon the principles of natural justice.