9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (2) TMI 747 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxPrinciples of Natural Justice - validity of assessment order - availability of alternative remedy of appeal - HELD THAT - It appears that the Department did not agitate the matter further and they accepted the order passed in the writ petition and the Assessing Officer took up the matter for denovo adjudication in terms of the order of remand and the proceedings have ultimately culminated in an assessment order dated 29.04.2019, which according to the learned counsel for the appellant is in favour of the appellant. Thus, taking note of the factual situation qua the prayer sought for by the petitioner and also taking note of the earlier orders passed by this Court remanding the matter back to the Assessing Officer and also the fact that the Assessing Officer has passed consequential orders dated 29.04.2019, we are inclined to follow the same procedure for the subject assessment years as well - Appeal allowed by way of remand.
Issues involved:
Challenging assessment orders under Central Sales Tax Act for assessment years 2007-08 and 2008-09; Admissibility of writ petitions; Jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India; Bypassing alternate remedy under taxing statutes; Violation of principles of natural justice in assessment orders; Rejection of para-wise comments by quasi-judicial authority; Setting aside impugned assessment orders; Remanding the matter back to the authorities for fresh consideration. Detailed Analysis: 1. Challenging Assessment Orders: The appeals were filed challenging assessment orders under the Central Sales Tax Act for the assessment years 2007-08 and 2008-09. The writ petitions were admitted, and an order of interim stay was granted in 2016. The Revenue did not file any counter affidavit or seek to vacate the interim orders. During the final hearing in November 2020, the Single Judge opined that the appellant must avail the alternate remedy as Article 226 of the Constitution is not meant to bypass statutory procedures. 2. Jurisdiction under Article 226: The High Court, while exercising jurisdiction under Article 226, is cautious in interfering with orders passed by statutory authorities when an appeal is provided for, especially in cases under taxing statutes. The court observed that each case must be decided on its own merits. The Supreme Court has emphasized that when an alternate remedy is available under a taxing statute, it should not be bypassed. 3. Violation of Principles of Natural Justice: The Court found that the impugned assessment orders were illegal as they violated the principles of natural justice. The assessing officer did not accept or reject the petitioner's request for extending time to submit objections, leading to an illegal order. The Court held that the impugned order was passed without affording the petitioner an opportunity of personal hearing, a statutory requirement. 4. Rejection of Para-wise Comments: The Court deprecated the manner in which the respondent, a quasi-judicial authority, provided para-wise comments. The Court directed the Principal Secretary/Commissioner of Commercial Taxes to ensure that para-wise comments are given by dealing with each factual contention raised by the petitioner, emphasizing the need for a thorough and thoughtful response. 5. Setting Aside Assessment Orders: The Court allowed the writ petitions, set aside the impugned assessment orders, and remanded the matters to the authorities for fresh consideration. The petitioner was directed to submit objections within a specified period, and the Assessing Officer was instructed to afford a personal hearing to the petitioner and pass a reasoned order within a specified timeframe. 6. Remand for Fresh Consideration: Following previous orders remanding the matter back to the Assessing Officer and considering the favorable assessment order dated 29.04.2019, the Court decided to follow the same procedure for the subject assessment years. The Writ Appeals were allowed, and the orders passed in the writ petitions were set aside, remanding the matters to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration. This comprehensive analysis covers the issues involved in the legal judgment delivered by the Madras High Court.
|
