2015 (4) TMI 361 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Reversal of input tax credit - Non production of purchase bills - Time production of purchase bills verification not granted - Held that - Court is fully convinced that the Assessing Officer has clearly abdicated his quasi-judicial power. The Honourable Division Bench of this Court, in the case of Madras Granties Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commercial Tax Officer, Arisipalayam Circle, Salem and another reported in (2002 (10) TMI 767 - MADRAS HIGH COURT), considered the question as to the manner in which the Assessing officer has to proceed with the assessment even though reopening of the assessment was pursuant to a proposal submitted in Form D3 by the Inspecting Officer. The Honourable Division Bench pointed out that the Assessing Officer is a quasi-judicial authority and in exercising his quasi-judicial function of completing the assessment, he is not bound by the instructions or directions of the higher authorities, the same are not sustainable in law. The Assessing Officer has been solely guided by the proposal given by the Inspecting Officer, thereby, there was no independent application of mind and duties enshrined on the Assessing Officer under the provisions of the Act have been given a go-by. Further, when the representations were made by the petitioner stating that the records which are produced had to be taken back for want of time and they are willing to produce the records, the Assessing Officer should have afforded an opportunity to the petitioner to produce their records and it is erroneous on the part of the Assessing Officer to have come to the conclusion that the claim made by the petitioner stating that they are having all original bills and the same may be verified and further action dropped is only an after thought. Furthermore, the observation that personal hearing need not be granted is perverse as it is contrary to the provisions of the Statute and contrary to the settled legal principles. - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues: Challenge to impugned orders of assessment for Assessment Years 2006-07 to 2012-13 under Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act and Central Sales Tax Act.

Analysis:
The petitioner, a registered dealer, contested assessment orders for several years. The Enforcement Wing found defects during an inspection, leading to notices being issued. The petitioner submitted replies and relevant documents, offering to produce purchase bills for verification. Despite representations, the Assessing Officer passed assessment orders alleging non-cooperation and rejecting objections. The High Court noted the Assessing Officer's failure to exercise quasi-judicial power independently. Referring to a previous case, the Court emphasized the Assessing Officer's duty to assess objectively, not merely follow proposals. The Court found the Assessing Officer erred in not allowing the petitioner to produce records and dismissing their claims. The Court deemed the denial of a personal hearing as contrary to legal principles. Consequently, the impugned orders were deemed unlawful, quashed, and the Assessing Officer directed to issue a summons for the petitioner to produce all relevant records, ensuring a fair assessment process.