2019 (7) TMI 97 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Validity of assessment order - time sought to file requisite records namely Books of Accounts and other related documents which was not provided - principles of natural justice - HELD THAT - The respondent shall reschedule/adjourn the personal hearing tomorrow i.e. 02.07.2019 and await verdict in W.P.No.16792 of 2019 before conducting personal hearing and dispose of these matters - In the adjourned / rescheduled personal hearing the documents already submitted by the writ petitioner shall be examined and a personal hearing shall be held. Post personal hearing the respondent shall pass Assessment orders afresh within a period of three weeks from the date of personal hearing - Petition allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
- Common set of facts under Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act 2006 (TNVAT ACT)
- Challenge to Assessment Orders for the years 2012-2013 and 2013-2014
- Compliance with Circular No.7/2014 dated 03.02.2014 regarding principles of natural justice
- Request for time to produce documents and denial of the same in Assessment orders
- Dispute resolution through personal hearing and fresh Assessment orders

Analysis:
The judgment by the Madras High Court pertains to three writ petitions arising under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act 2006 for the Assessment Years 2012-2013 and 2013-2014. The core issue in all three petitions was the denial of time to file requisite records during the Assessment process. The writ petitioner sought time to produce documents but Assessment orders were passed without granting the requested time. The court referred to Circular No.7/2014 emphasizing principles of natural justice, specifically the need to provide a reasonable opportunity to dealers before passing any order. The court highlighted the importance of adhering to natural justice principles and ensuring that dealers are given a fair chance to present their case.

In light of the above, the court set aside the impugned orders in all three writ petitions and directed a personal hearing to be held on a specified date. The writ petitioner was instructed to appear before the Assessment officer with the documents already submitted. Following the personal hearing, the respondent was directed to pass fresh Assessment orders within a specified timeframe. The court emphasized the need for the respondent to communicate the fresh Assessment orders to the writ petitioner promptly. The judgment aimed at resolving the dispute by providing a fair opportunity for the writ petitioner to present their case and ensuring compliance with principles of natural justice.

The court's decision focused on upholding procedural fairness and ensuring that the Assessment process was conducted in accordance with the principles of natural justice. By setting aside the previous orders and directing a fresh Assessment process with a personal hearing, the court aimed to address the concerns raised by the writ petitioner regarding the denial of time to produce documents. The judgment underscored the importance of providing a fair opportunity for dealers to present their case and ensuring that Assessment orders are passed in compliance with established procedures and principles of natural justice.