9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (12) TMI 473 - HC - VAT / Sales TaxMaintainability of petition - remedy of appeal available - time limitation - Petitioner did not prefer any appeal before the Appellate Authority, but has instead filed these Writ Petitions challenging the orders passed by the Respondent beyond the maximum limitation period of 60 days from the date of receipt of copy of those orders - HELD THAT - Though in the order dated 01.09.2006 in the earlier Writ Petitions in W.P. Nos. 15355 and 15356 of 2005 filed by the Petitioner challenging the notices to re-assess the tax, this Court had permitted to proceed further in accordance with law, the assessing authority was unable to do so on account of another order of interim stay passed by this Court in the Writ Petition in W.P. No. 21601 of 2004 filed by Dyers Association of Tirupur, till it had been finally decided by order dated 21.07.2017 in favour of the Respondent. This would go to show that the Respondent could not be faulted for the time taken for the finalization of the proceedings. The Division Bench of this Court in State of Tamil nadu -vs- Tex-in-Printers 2013 (10) TMI 1279 - MADRAS HIGH COURT has reiterated that after introduction of Section 3-B and the amendment made to the definition of 'sale' in Section 2(n)(ii) of the TNGST Act, the transfer of goods involved in works contract would amount to 'sale' and the entire turnover has become assessable to tax and that the same view has been expressed by another Division Bench of this Court in S tate of Tamil Nadu -vs- Tvl. Tamil Nadu Co-operative Textile Processing Mills Limited 2019 (6) TMI 1510 - MADRAS HIGH COURT , meaning thereby that the Petitioner cannot have any grievance for the re-assessment of tax liability based on that settled question of law. Petition dismissed.
Issues:
1. Challenge to re-assessment orders beyond the limitation period. 2. Jurisdiction of the Court to entertain Writ Petition when no appeal was filed before Appellate Authority. 3. Completion of re-assessment within the statutory time limit. 4. Interpretation of the word "determine" in the context of sales tax legislation. 5. Effect of interim stay orders on finalization of proceedings. 6. Applicability of amendments to the definition of 'sale' in the TNGST Act on tax liability. Analysis: 1. The petitioner challenged re-assessment orders beyond the statutory limitation period of 60 days from receipt, despite not filing an appeal before the Appellate Authority. Citing a Supreme Court ruling, the Court emphasized that Writ Petitions should not be entertained if the order was not appealed within the limitation period. The Court rejected the petitioner's argument that the ruling applied only to cases where an appeal was filed but not entertained due to being time-barred, stating that the legislative intent should not be circumvented by invoking discretionary powers under Article 226 of the Constitution. 2. The Court addressed the jurisdiction issue, highlighting that the petitioner directly approached the Court to challenge the order after the limitation period for filing an appeal had lapsed. The Court emphasized that not filing an appeal before the Appellate Authority did not justify approaching the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution. 3. The petitioner contended that the re-assessment was completed beyond the five-year limit stipulated in Section 16 of the TNGST Act. However, the Court referenced a previous decision and a Supreme Court ruling to explain that the notices for re-assessment were issued within the prescribed time from the dates of the final assessment orders, thereby complying with the statutory requirements. 4. The interpretation of the word "determine" in the context of sales tax legislation was discussed, emphasizing that the assessment process should be completed within the prescribed period. The Court referred to previous judgments to support the principle that assessment proceedings should not be unduly delayed, and the word "determine" encompasses the entire assessment process. 5. The impact of interim stay orders on the finalization of proceedings was explained, noting that the assessing authority faced delays due to interim stay orders issued by the Court in related cases. This delay was considered a valid reason for the time taken to finalize the proceedings, absolving the Respondent of fault. 6. The Court referred to Division Bench rulings to support the re-assessment of tax liability based on amendments to the definition of 'sale' in the TNGST Act. The settled interpretation that the transfer of goods in works contracts amounts to 'sale' and is assessable to tax was upheld, dismissing the petitioner's grievances. In conclusion, the Writ Petitions lacking merits were dismissed, and the connected Miscellaneous Petition was closed without costs.
|
