2024 (3) TMI 909 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Violation of principles of natural justice - Validity of assessment order - bills to indicate that no form 'C' was ever issued not considered - erroneous observation that sale took place - no opportunity of hearing has been accorded to the revisionist at any stage by the authorities. Revisionist was having three copies of the bills in his bill book which has not been appreciated by the competent authority - HELD THAT - Perusal of the assessment order dated 24.03.2011 would indicate that the version of the revisionist has been considered by the assessing authority and he has observed that he himself has examined the bill book upon being produced by the revisionist but the bill book is not having the original bill contained in the bill book. Thus, the said ground is rejected. Incidentally, this finding of the bill book having been examined by the Authority has not been denied anywhere by the revisionist upon filing of either the first appeal or the second appeal. The learned Tribunal has erroneously observed in the judgment dated 14.12.2012 that sale took place with respect to bill no. 107 dated 01.01.2008 and bill no.121 dated 30.01.2008 of which all three copies are available in the bill book as per the list of sales produced before the Tax Assessing Authority - HELD THAT - No denial to the said finding has been given by the revisionist while filing the instant revision of the said sales being indicated in the list of sales produced before the Assessing Authority. As such, the said ground is rejected. No opportunity of hearing has been accorded to the revisionist - HELD THAT - The said ground is also misconceived considering that the assessment order dated 24.03.2011 has been passed after issuing notice to the revisionist and thereafter the revisionist had ample opportunity while filing the first and second appeal of rebutting the specific finding that had been given by the assessing authority which he himself failed to do - while considering the revision filed by the revisionist and even considering the grounds as raised by the learned counsel for the revisionist, no perversity or illegality emerges and consequently no case for interference is made out. The instant revision as well as the connected revision is dismissed at the admission stage.

Summary

Issues involved: Challenge to order dated 14.12.2012 dismissing second appeal u/s 28 of the U.P. Value Added Tax, 2008; Grounds raised: (a) Non-issuance of form 'C' as per bill copies; (b) Discrepancy in sale bills 107 and 121; (c) Alleged lack of hearing opportunity.

The High Court considered a revision challenging the dismissal of a second appeal under Section 28 of the U.P. Value Added Tax, 2008. The revisionist contended that the assessing authority did not consider the presence of three bill copies in the bill book indicating non-issuance of form 'C'. However, the Court noted that the assessing authority had examined the bill book and found it lacking the original bill, leading to the rejection of this ground. The revisionist did not dispute this finding during the appeal process.

Regarding the discrepancy in sale bills 107 and 121, the revisionist claimed that all three copies were in the bill book, yet the sales were listed before the Assessing Authority. Despite this, the revisionist did not contest this fact during the revision process, resulting in the rejection of this ground as well.

The revisionist also alleged a lack of opportunity for a hearing. However, the Court found this ground to be misconceived as the assessment order was issued after notice to the revisionist, who had opportunities during the first and second appeals to challenge specific findings. Citing legal precedent, the Court emphasized the finality of the Tribunal's fact-finding role. Consequently, no perversity or illegality was found in the impugned order, leading to the dismissal of the revision at the admission stage.