2021 (8) TMI 547 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Time limit for filing appeal - Constitutional validity of Section 2(11) of Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 - HELD THAT - While upholding the validity of Section 2(11) of the TNVAT Act, the Hon'ble Division Bench in M/S. SCHWING STETTER (INDIA) PVT. LTD. VERSUS THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER 2016 (5) TMI 912 - MADRAS HIGH COURT rejected the prayers sought for by the writ petitioner for declaration. However, liberty was granted to prefer an appeal against the individual orders of assessment and the time limit of 30 days granted by the original authority was extended and to be reckoned from the date of issue of copy of that order. Thus, the petitioner in the present writ petitions are also entitled to prefer an appeal against the order of assessment by extending the benefit granted by the Hon'ble Division Bench in respect of the time limit prescribed for appeal. The petitioner is permitted to prefer an appeal against the impugned orders of assessment within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and if any such appeal is filed by the petitioner before the Appellate Authority, the appellate authority is directed to condone the delay and entertain the appeal - petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
Challenging assessment orders, validity of Section 2(11) of TNVAT Act, extension of time limit for filing appeals, liberty to prefer an appeal against individual orders of assessment.

Analysis:
The writ petitions were filed to challenge assessment orders passed, with the main contention being the validity of Section 2(11) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006. The Hon'ble Division Bench of the Madras High Court had previously upheld the provision of Section 2(11) in a previous judgment, rejecting the prayer for a declaration that it was ultra vires and unconstitutional. The Bench also allowed a 30-day period for assessees to file statutory appeals against individual assessment orders. The Court directed that during this period, no coercive steps should be taken by the respondents. Additionally, specific instructions were given regarding the treatment of petitioners dealing with capital goods and the concessional rate of tax, emphasizing the need for a proper understanding of the definition of 'manufacture' under Section 2(27). The appellate authorities were instructed to consider certain provisions while deciding on appeals, ensuring a fair and thorough review process.

In the present case, the validity of Section 2(11) of the TNVAT Act was upheld, similar to the previous judgment by the Division Bench. The petitioners were granted the liberty to prefer an appeal against the individual assessment orders within 30 days from the receipt of the court's order. This extension of the time limit for filing appeals was in line with the directions given by the Division Bench, ensuring consistency in the treatment of such cases. The Court directed the appellate authority to condone any delays in filing appeals and to handle the appeals on their merits, providing the writ petitioners with a fair opportunity for redressal in accordance with the law and as expeditiously as possible.

Conclusively, the Court permitted the petitioner to file appeals against the impugned assessment orders within the specified time frame, with the appellate authority instructed to consider and decide on the appeals fairly and promptly. The writ petitions were thus disposed of with no costs imposed, and the connected miscellaneous petition was closed accordingly.