2023 (3) TMI 632 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Attachment of petitioner's Bank Account - even without passing an assessment order for the respective assessment years, the impugned proceedings has been issued by the first respondent, exercising its power under Section 45 of the TNVAT Act 2006, which according to the petitioner is arbitrary and illegal. HELD THAT - Admittedly, only after passing the assessment orders, any coercive recovery proceedings can be initiated by the first respondent against the petitioner - This Court requested the learned Government Advocate appearing for the first respondent to get instructions as to whether any assessment orders were passed in respect of the respective assessment years prior to issuing the impugned proceedings dated 30.01.2023. Unless and until the assessment orders are passed in respect of all the assessment years, for which the attachment order has been passed, which is the subject matter of challenge in this writ petition, the first respondent cannot exercise its power under Section 45 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 to enforce the sums alleged to be due and payable by the petitioner towards tax liability. If at all, the first respondent can take coercive steps against the petitioner under Section 45 of the TNVAT Act only in respect of the assessment years, where the assessment orders are passed. But being a single proceeding dated 30.01.2023, covering all the assessment years right from 2006-07 to 2016-17, it/the proceeding has to be declared as invalid as in respect of some of the assessment years, mentioned in the impugned proceeding dated 30.01.2023, no assessment orders were passed by the first respondent prior to the issuance of the impugned proceedings. The petitioner also categorically contends that in respect of all the assessment years, for which the impugned proceedings dated 30.01.2023 has been passed, the respondents have not passed any assessment order. Necessarily for the aforementioned reasons, the impugned proceedings dated 30.01.2023 passed by the first respondent has to be quashed and the writ petition will have to be allowed. Petition allowed.

Summary

Issues:
Challenging impugned communication directing attachment of funds under TNVAT Act 2006 without assessment orders.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged a communication dated 30.01.2023, where the first respondent directed a bank to attach funds in the petitioner's account, claiming it as tax liability under CST and TNVAT Act 2006 for assessment years 2006-07 to 2016-17. The first respondent acted under Section 45 of the TNVAT Act, requesting the bank to withhold the amount and pay it to the first respondent. The petitioner argued that the proceedings were arbitrary and illegal as no assessment orders were passed for the mentioned assessment years before the communication was issued.

The court requested clarification on assessment orders from the first respondent. A tabular column was presented, showing assessment orders passed for some years and pending for others. It was noted that coercive recovery proceedings can only be initiated after passing assessment orders. The court found that the first respondent had attached funds without passing assessment orders for all the mentioned years, making the proceedings invalid. The petitioner asserted that no assessment orders were passed for any of the years covered by the impugned communication.

Consequently, the court quashed the impugned communication dated 30.01.2023 and allowed the writ petition. The first respondent was permitted to enforce assessment orders passed for specific years in accordance with the law. No costs were awarded, and the connected miscellaneous petition was closed.