2024 (2) TMI 724 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Validity of assessment order under Section 25(1) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act 2003 - suppression of turnover - evasion of tax - petitioner never bothered to file a reply to the show cause notices and notices for producing the relevant records for completing the assessment - HELD THAT - The assessment order would disclose that the petitioner was given notice for producing the relevant records to complete the assessment. The petitioner never bothered to file reply to the notices. The proposed assessment order was also served on the petitioner requiring him to file objection if any. The petitioner did not file any objection to the proposed assessment order and not appeared for the personal hearing granted by the assessing authority - the impugned order is not without jurisdiction or against the express provision of the law. This court cannot examine the merit of the impugned assessment order as this court does not exercise the appellate jurisdiction. While exercising the writ jurisdiction this court has to consider whether the order passed by the authority is within jurisdiction or without jurisdiction or it is against the express provision of the law. Both the conditions are absent in this present case and therefore there are no ground to grant any indulgence to the petitioner against the impugned assessment order. The present writ petition is dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
The assessment order under Section 25(1) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 is challenged based on the evidence collected by the State Tax Officer from the Income Tax return filed by the petitioner.

Details of the Judgment:

Issue 1: Assessment Order Challenge
The petitioner challenged the assessment order on the grounds that it was solely based on the income tax return filed by the company owned by the petitioner and his wife. The petitioner argued that the assessment should not have been completed solely based on this evidence under Section 25(1) of the KVAT Act. The petitioner contended that the assessment order was incorrect and should be set aside.

Issue 2: Opportunity Given to Petitioner
The Government Pleader argued that the petitioner was given multiple opportunities to respond to show cause notices and the proposed assessment order but failed to do so. The petitioner did not file any objection or appear for the personal hearing granted by the assessing authority. It was submitted that the petitioner cannot raise objections before the court as he did not avail the opportunities given and failed to follow the proper procedure of filing a statutory appeal under Section 55 of the KVAT Act.

Judgment Summary:
The court reviewed the submissions and documents presented. It noted that the petitioner did not respond to the notices or file objections to the proposed assessment order. The court found that the impugned order was not beyond the jurisdiction or against the law's provisions. It emphasized that the court's role is to ensure the order is within jurisdiction and compliant with the law, not to act as an appellate authority. As there were no grounds for intervention, the court dismissed the writ petition. The petitioner was advised to explore other available remedies if desired.