2019 (7) TMI 819 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Validity of assessment order - benefit of Karasamadhan Scheme, 2019 - it is alleged that no statutory Forms were submitted by the petitioner company to avail the reduced rate of tax - HELD THAT - There is no cavil on the proposition that the declaration Form can be filed at a subsequent point of time and not necessarily along with the returns. It is also well established principle that the declaration Forms can be filed before the Appellate Authority also - If the Assessing Authority is satisfied that the assessee was prevented from sufficient cause which disenabled him to file the Forms in time, the same can be accepted in terms of the proviso to Rule 12(7), albeit rule 12(7) prescribes a time limit of three months after the end of the period to which the declaration has to be filed, but that cannot be extended to decades. Prescribing three months time for furnishing declaration Forms may be directory but the same should be furnished within a reasonable time. However, in the present case, no such declaration Forms are furnished, but it is only permission sought to furnish such declaration Forms before the Assessing Authority beyond the period of limitation to file an appeal before the Authorities. The inordinate delay of decades cannot be condoned merely for the reason that the proceedings were pending before BIFR. The Full Bench of Madras High Court in the case of State of Tamil Nadu, STATE OF TAMIL NADU VERSUS ARULMURUGAN AND COMPANY 1982 (11) TMI 143 - MADRAS HIGH COURT , in the context of furnishing of declaration Forms under Rule 12(7) of the Rules has observed that the assessee did not file statutory Forms before the statutory Authority before the completion of the assessment, however before the Appellate Authority leave to file the relevant declaration Forms was sought for, but was declined. There is no dispute with the aforesaid legal principle enunciated by the Hon ble Court - In the present case, the challenge made to the assessment orders under the writ jurisdiction relating to the assessment years 1995-1996 to 2007-2008 cannot be entertained to enable the petitioner to avail the Karasamadhan Scheme, 2019. Petition dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
Challenging assessment orders for multiple years under various tax acts, failure to submit statutory Forms for reduced tax rate, seeking re-assessment based on Forms submission, invoking writ jurisdiction for remand, delay in filing Forms, applicability of time limits for maintaining accounts, relevance of previous court rulings on Forms submission.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged assessment orders for several years under different tax acts due to a significant tax liability. The petitioner, a company, faced financial difficulties leading to a reference to the BIFR and subsequent declaration as a sick company. The company failed to challenge assessment orders earlier, resulting in a substantial tax liability. The petitioner argued that the failure to submit statutory Forms for reduced tax rates led to inflated tax liabilities. The petitioner sought re-assessment based on the belated submission of Forms to benefit from a tax relief scheme. The court noted that Forms could be submitted later under certain conditions but emphasized reasonable time limits for such submissions.

The court highlighted that while there are provisions for filing Forms beyond the initial deadline, such extensions cannot be indefinite. The court referenced specific rules regarding the maintenance of accounts under different tax acts and emphasized the importance of timely compliance with statutory requirements. The court distinguished the present case from previous judgments where Forms were submitted, stating that seeking permission to file Forms after decades is not acceptable, especially considering the lapse of statutory time limits for appeal and assessment processes.

Referring to previous court decisions, the court reiterated the importance of timely submission of Forms and the authority's discretion to allow extensions based on sufficient cause. The court emphasized that the delay in filing Forms cannot be condoned merely due to ongoing proceedings before other authorities. The court dismissed the writ petitions, stating that the challenge to assessment orders for past years cannot be entertained solely to enable participation in a current tax relief scheme.