2022 (7) TMI 45 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Validity of Pre-Assessment Notice and the impugned Assessment Order - HELD THAT - As far as the petitioner in W.P.No.13292 of 2022 is concerned, the writ petition is pre-mature. Therefore, this Writ Petition is disposed off by directing the petitioner to file a reply to the pre-assessment notice dated 08.04.2022 within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of such reply, the respondent shall pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law. As far as the petitioner in W.P.No.13300 of 2022 is concerned, it appears that the petitioner had not replied to the pre-assessment notice dated 07.03.2022 and thus the impugned order has been passed. Considering the fact that the petitioner in W.P.No.13300 of 2022 was heard before the impugned Assessment Order was passed, the impugned Assessment Order dated 04.04.2022 is quashed and the case remitted back to the respondent to pass a speaking order. The impugned order which stand quashed, shall be treated as corrigendum to the impugned preassessment notice dated 07.03.2022. Writ petiton disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
1. Challenge to Pre-Assessment Notice in W.P.No.13292 of 2022
2. Challenge to Assessment Order in W.P.No.13300 of 2022

Analysis:
1. Challenge to Pre-Assessment Notice (W.P.No.13292 of 2022):
- The petitioner contested the Pre-Assessment Notice dated 08.04.2022, citing the decision of the Supreme Court in a specific case.
- The respondent argued that the petition was premature as the petitioner had not yet responded to the notice issued by the Commercial Tax Department.
- The court found the petition premature and directed the petitioner to reply to the notice within 30 days. The respondent was instructed to make a decision based on the reply and the Supreme Court's decision.

2. Challenge to Assessment Order (W.P.No.13300 of 2022):
- The petitioner challenged the Assessment Order dated 04.04.2022, alleging that the purchase of alcoholic liquor from TASMAC was not declared in the returns filed under the TNVAT Act, 2006.
- It was noted that the petitioner did not respond to the pre-assessment notice dated 07.03.2022, leading to the issuance of the impugned order.
- The court decided to quash the Assessment Order and send the case back to the respondent for a detailed review. The petitioner was given 30 days to respond, and the Assessing Officer was directed to make a decision within 30 days after that, considering the Supreme Court's decision.

In conclusion, both Writ Petitions were disposed of with specific instructions for each case. The court emphasized the importance of responding to notices and following due process in tax assessment matters. No costs were awarded, and the connected Miscellaneous Petitions were closed as a result of the judgment.