2020 (6) TMI 591 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Levy of VAT - Inter-state Branch Transfer - petitioner contends that there is no element of sale involved in this transaction and the petitioner was not liable to pay any tax on it and did not report it in its CST-VI returns - HELD THAT - The petitioner had raised substantial contentions both on law and on facts and the 1st respondent ought to have provided a personal hearing after the COVID-19 pandemic situation resolves to enable the petitioner to submit the documentary evidence regarding its defence that the turnover of ₹ 40,68,01,526/- relates to inter-State purchase of goods under inter-State branch transfer and there is no element of sale involved in it - there has been denial of opportunity to the petitioner by the 1st respondent in view of the COVID-19 pandemic and the consequent lockdown and therefore, the impugned order of Assessment dt.31.03.2020 is vitiated. The matter is remitted back to the 1st respondent to determine afresh after affording hearing to the petitioner within two (2) months - Petition allowed by way of remand.

Issues:
1. Denial of adequate opportunity to present documentary evidence during COVID-19 pandemic.
2. Authority of the respondents to demand tax on goods received under inter-State purchases/branch transfer.
3. Validity of the Final Assessment Order issued by the 1st respondent.
4. Opportunity for a personal hearing post-COVID-19 situation.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Denial of adequate opportunity during COVID-19 pandemic
The petitioner, a company engaged in export of IT/Software Services, faced a demand notice for tax amounting to a significant sum. The petitioner contended that it was not given a fair chance to present documentary evidence due to the COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent lockdown. Despite assurances of further document submission, the respondent proceeded with the assessment without considering all evidence. The Court acknowledged the impact of the pandemic on the petitioner's ability to provide documents and deemed the assessment order as flawed due to the denial of a proper opportunity during the pandemic.

Issue 2: Authority to demand tax on goods received under inter-State purchases/branch transfer
The petitioner argued that there was no element of sale involved in the turnover related to inter-State purchases/branch transfers, and thus, no tax should have been demanded. The respondent's determination of tax dues was challenged as lacking legal authority. The Court noted the petitioner's submission of invoices related to the disputed turnover and agreed that the demand made by the respondent was without legal basis.

Issue 3: Validity of the Final Assessment Order
The Final Assessment Order issued by the 1st respondent was challenged by the petitioner on various grounds, including the lack of opportunity to present evidence and the improper determination of tax dues. The Court found the assessment order to be vitiated due to the denial of a fair opportunity to the petitioner during the pandemic. Consequently, the order was set aside, and the matter was remitted back to the respondent for fresh determination after affording a proper hearing to the petitioner.

Issue 4: Opportunity for a personal hearing post-COVID-19 situation
The Court emphasized the importance of providing the petitioner with a personal hearing post the COVID-19 pandemic situation to enable the submission of all relevant documentary evidence. The Court directed the respondent to allow the petitioner one month to submit all documents and to consider them before passing any fresh orders. The judgment granted the petitioner the opportunity to present its case effectively after the pandemic situation resolved.

In conclusion, the High Court allowed the Writ Petition, set aside the Final Assessment Order, and remitted the matter back to the respondent for fresh determination with proper hearing. The petitioner was granted time to submit all documentary evidence, emphasizing the importance of a fair opportunity to present its case.

← Previous Next →