2015 (12) TMI 528 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Denial of concessional rate of taxes of 2% - non production of C forms related to interstate sales as well as export documents before the 2nd respondent who passed the assessment order - Held that - Additional Government Pleader fairly submitted that the 3rd respondent may be directed to issue fresh notice by granting time and on receipt of the same, the petitioner may be directed to submit C- Forms as well as export documents and on receipt of the same, the 3rd respondent may be directed to consider the same and pass appropriate orders within a time frame. - In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader (Taxes), this Court is of the view that the impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent dated 17.01.2014 is liable to be set aside and the petitioner must be given an opportunity to produce the C forms. - Matter remanded back - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to assessment order based on non-production of statutory forms and export documents, rejection of appeal by Appellate Authority on grounds of delay, legality of ex parte assessment order, violation of principles of natural justice.

Analysis:
The petitioner, a manufacturer of Transformers, challenged the assessment order of the 2nd respondent due to non-production of 'C' Forms and export documents. The petitioner contended that due to business fluctuations, these documents were not available at the time of assessment but are now in possession. The petitioner sought an opportunity to present these documents before the 3rd respondent, the current assessing authority. The Court acknowledged that the petitioner needs a chance to provide the statutory forms and directed the 3rd respondent to issue a fresh notice for submission of 'C' Forms and export documents within specific time frames.

The Appellate Authority rejected the appeal on the grounds of delay, which the petitioner challenged, arguing that the rejection was erroneous and lacked consideration of reasonable cause and submissions. The Court noted the petitioner's contentions and directed the 3rd respondent to reconsider the case based on the newly submitted documents within a specified time frame.

The legality of the ex parte assessment order was also questioned by the petitioner, alleging it was illegal, erroneous in law, and violated principles of natural justice. The Additional Government Pleader defended the assessment order, stating that notice was issued, and sufficient time was given for document submission, which the petitioner failed to utilize. The Court considered the arguments from both sides and decided to set aside the impugned order, granting the petitioner an opportunity to produce the necessary documents for re-assessment.

In conclusion, the Court quashed the assessment order of the 2nd respondent and remitted the matter back to the 3rd respondent for fresh assessment. The 3rd respondent was directed to issue a fresh notice, and upon submission of 'C' Forms and export documents by the petitioner, pass appropriate orders within specified time frames. The writ petition was disposed of with the mentioned directions, without any costs incurred.