2022 (11) TMI 685 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Validity of assessment order - sales suppression - Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, read with the relevant rules - HELD THAT - The order passed by the Appellate Tribunal is well considered and requires no interference. This Court, in exercising the power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is only concerned with decision making process and not decision per se. The fact on record also indicates that the attempt of the petitioner to distance himself from the liability was made only before the Appellate Commissioner by producing few affidavits of persons whose names were in the slip. This is long after the assessment notice was issued on 31.12.1998. Further, Section 38B clearly stipulates that reasons has to be recorded in writing by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner that he has considered such document as genuine and failure to produce the same before the Assessing Authority was beyond the control of the dealer. Thus, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner committed an error in allowing the petitioner's appeal based on affidavits of so called persons whose name were there in the slips - the order of the Tribunal does not warrant any interference. The Writ Petition is dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against the Appellate Tribunal's order dated 18.12.2006 in CTSA.No.55/02 regarding an adverse assessment order for TNGST 1997-98. The petitioner contests the Tribunal's reversal of the Additional Appellate Assistant Commissioner's decision dated 30.03.2001. The key issues are suppression of sales and the acceptance of quotations as explanations for discrepancies.

Analysis:
The petitioner contested the Tribunal's decision to overturn the Additional Appellate Assistant Commissioner's ruling, arguing that the explanations provided for discrepancies were accepted by the Appellate Commissioner. The petitioner maintained that the quotations presented were valid and that the department's conclusion of sale suppression based on those quotations was unwarranted. The petitioner relied on section 39B(2) of the TNGST Act, emphasizing the genuineness of the documents and the reasons for their delayed submission.

The Commercial Tax Department defended the Tribunal's decision, asserting that the burden of proof lay with the petitioner and that the evidence presented post the inspection did not justify overturning the original assessment. The department contended that the Tribunal's order was well-considered and should not be interfered with, given the timing of the evidence submission and the lack of justification for the petitioner's attempt to distance themselves from liability.

The High Court, after considering the arguments from both sides and reviewing the relevant orders and documents, upheld the Tribunal's decision. The Court emphasized that its role was to assess the decision-making process rather than the decision itself. It noted that the petitioner's attempt to disassociate from liability by producing affidavits long after the assessment notice was issued was not valid under Section 38B. The Court concluded that the Tribunal's order was well-founded and did not warrant intervention, ultimately dismissing the writ petition without costs.