9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (7) TMI 553 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxPrinciples of natural justice - service of assessment order - contention of the petitioner is to the effect that no orders of assessment have been passed and hence the demands are non-est and invalid - HELD THAT - Though the orders of assessment appear to have been dispatched, they have been returned and hence have not been served upon the assessee. Learned counsel for the petitioner confirms that copies of the orders of assessment have been received by him now and the same will be duly handed over to the petitioner as well. In the light of the position that the orders of assessment giving rise to the impugned demands admittedly have not been served upon the petitioner, the impugned recovery notice has no legs to stand and is hence quashed. The interim stay of recovery granted on 15.07.2020 will continue for a period of four (4) weeks from today to enable the petitioner to take such action as it may be inclined as against the orders of assessment. Petition disposed off.
Issues:
Challenge to order of Assistant Commissioner regarding demands under Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 for the periods 2008-09 to 2015-16 due to lack of assessment orders. Analysis: The petitioner contested the order of the Assistant Commissioner demanding payment of &8377; 1,38,94,846 for the mentioned periods, arguing that no assessment orders were issued, rendering the demands invalid. Upon submission by the Government Advocate that assessment orders were passed for 2013-14, 2014-15, and 2015-16, the court directed the production of these orders and proof of service to the petitioner. Subsequently, it was revealed that the assessment orders for the entire period in question were circulated but not served due to being returned. The petitioner's counsel acknowledged receiving the assessment orders and assured their delivery to the petitioner. In light of the non-service of the assessment orders leading to the disputed demands, the court deemed the recovery notice baseless and annulled it. The interim stay on recovery, granted earlier, was extended for four weeks to allow the petitioner time to respond to the assessment orders. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of accordingly, with no costs incurred.
|
