2017 (10) TMI 391 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Validity of assessment order - reversal of input tax credit - demand on the ground that details with regard to opening stock, purchase, sales, Branch Transfer and closing stock separately for local purchase, import purchases and interstate purchases are not furnished - Held that - there is no specific denial by the respondent with regard to the averments made by the petitioner that all split-up details, as sought for were furnished to the respondent. This Court is at a loss to understand as to how the assessee would be benefited by not fully disclosing the figures, when his case is that substantial portion of transactions had been disclosed - this Court is of the view that one more opportunity should be granted to the petitioner to go before the Assessing Officer to establish all their transactions - writ petition is disposed of, by directing the petitioner to treat the impugned proceedings as a Show Cause Notice and submit relevant documents.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to assessment order under Central Sales Act for the year 2013-2014 based on lack of furnished details regarding stock, purchases, and sales.

Analysis:
The petitioner, a registered dealer under the Central Sales Act and Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, contested an assessment order directing reversal of most input tax credit due to missing detailed transaction information. The petitioner argued that split-up figures were provided to the Assessing Officer, supported by a Branch Transfer register and an endorsement in the Letter Delivery Book. The Government Advocate presented written instructions from the Assessing Officer, not refuting the petitioner's claim of providing necessary details. The Court found it perplexing that the petitioner would benefit from withholding information when claiming to have disclosed a significant portion of transactions. Consequently, the Court decided to grant the petitioner another opportunity to present all transaction details before the Assessing Officer.

The Court disposed of the writ petition by instructing the petitioner to treat the assessment proceedings as a Show Cause Notice and submit additional objections with detailed statements of opening stock, purchases, sales, branch transfers, and closing stock for various types of purchases. The petitioner was given one week to submit objections, after which the respondent was to provide a personal hearing and issue a reasoned order based on merits and the law. No coercive action was to be taken against the petitioner until these directions were fulfilled, and no costs were awarded. The connected miscellaneous petition was closed as a consequence of the judgment.