2020 (3) TMI 1092 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Levy of Interest u/s 24 (3) of TNVAT Act - incorrect availment of deferral for the assessment years 2001-02 and 2002-03 - adequate reasons for levy of interest given or not - HELD THAT - This Court, in order to give an opportunity, by treating the impugned orders as show cause notices, directs the petitioner to submit the required documents to correlate the production figure before the authority / respondent, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order - The respondent shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders afresh. Petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to levy of interest under Section 24 (3) of the erstwhile TNGST Act for incorrect availment of deferral for assessment years 2001-02 and 2002-03.

Analysis:
The petitioner, originally registered under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act and Central Sales Tax Act, subsequently registered under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, challenged the levy of interest for incorrect availment of deferral. The petitioner claimed eligibility for deferral under a scheme by the State Government for industries undertaking expansion. A notice was issued alleging the petitioner was not eligible for deferral for a specific period. The petitioner contended that they had met the conditions for deferral but the reply was deemed unacceptable as per the Eligibility Certificate. The impugned orders were passed based on this discrepancy, leading to the filing of writ petitions.

The petitioner's counsel was unable to provide the actual production value for the assessment years to support the claim that the interest levy was against the deferral scheme. The Government Advocate for the respondent argued that the Assessing Authority had valid reasons for levying the interest. The Court considered both sides' submissions and reviewed the available materials.

In its judgment, the Court directed the petitioner to submit the required documents to correlate the production figures within four weeks. The respondent was instructed to consider the documents and pass fresh orders within four weeks of submission. The Court treated the impugned orders as show cause notices to provide the petitioner with an opportunity to clarify the production figures and address the discrepancy. The writ petitions were disposed of with no costs, and the connected matters were closed.