2015 (12) TMI 526 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Validity of revision order to enhance the turnover and rate of tax - Jurisdiction - Violation of principle of natural justice - Held that - Revisional show-cause notice records that sales of raw material were not brought under the net turnover. In reply thereto the petitioner stated that they had sold raw fish purchased at the harbour. They placed copies of the invoices and their ledger before the revisional authority. If the second respondent was of the view that the information provided by the petitioner was insufficient, and information regarding the amounts received on the sale of fish should have been placed before him, nothing prevented him from seeking such information. The petitioner has not been given an opportunity of being heard, as he has not been informed of the nature of information which the second respondent considered necessary to examine the petitioner s plea that they had only sold raw fish which is exempt from tax under entry 24 of the First Schedule to the Act. The impugned assessment order is in violation of the principles of natural justice and is, accordingly, set aside. - Petition disposed of.

Summary

Issues:
Jurisdiction of revisional authority and violation of principles of natural justice.

Analysis:
The petitioner, a private limited company, challenged the revisional authority's order dated February 26, 2014, alleging lack of jurisdiction and violation of natural justice principles. The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer had issued an assessment order for the tax period January 1, 2009, to March 31, 2013, bringing certain turnovers to tax as sales of raw material not disclosed in the net turnover. The revisional authority sought to levy tax at a higher rate, claiming loss to the State exchequer. The petitioner contended that the sales in question were of fresh fish exempt under the Act's provisions. They provided detailed explanations and supporting documents, including sales ledgers, invoices, and payment proofs from buyers. However, the revisional authority found the petitioner's submissions unconvincing, alleging fabrication of documents to evade tax. The authority did not provide the petitioner with an opportunity to address specific concerns or provide additional information, leading to a violation of natural justice principles.

The High Court found that the revisional authority's assessment order lacked clarity and failed to specify the nature of information required from the petitioner to address their claims regarding the sales of raw fish. The Court noted that the petitioner had cooperated by submitting relevant documents, and if the authority deemed the information insufficient, it should have requested additional details instead of assuming fabrication. The Court emphasized that the petitioner was entitled to a fair hearing and the opportunity to address any deficiencies in their submissions. Consequently, the Court set aside the impugned assessment order, directing the revisional authority to seek necessary information from the petitioner and pass a fresh order in accordance with the law. The writ petition was disposed of with no costs awarded, allowing for the resolution of any pending miscellaneous petitions.