2024 (7) TMI 465 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Violation of principles of natural justice - Challenge to assessment order - non-furnishing of documents - failure to file any reply - Assessment Years 2006-2007 2007-2008 - HELD THAT - There is manifest violation of principles of natural justice inasmuch as the petitioner has produced documents along with the reply dated 13.02.2019. These have not been considered. Instead, the petitioner has been blamed for not producing purchase invoices. In case, any shortcoming was noticed in the documents filed by the petitioner, the petitioner could have been called upon to produce such documents such as purchase invoices. However, in the impugned order, the shortcoming has been pointed out for the first time. The impugned Assessment Orders are set aside and the cases are remitted back to the second respondent to pass fresh orders on merits within a period of 3 months from the date of disposal of this order - Petition disposed off by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to Assessment Orders under Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 for the years 2006-2007 & 2007-2008. Allegation of non-consideration of documents by the second respondent. Violation of principles of natural justice.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged the Assessment Orders dated 30.11.2020 for the years 2006-2007 & 2007-2008 under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006. The petitioner contended that detailed replies were provided on 13.02.2019 with various supporting documents, but the Assessment Orders did not acknowledge this submission. The petitioner specifically highlighted the absence of a reply on 14.02.2019, as mentioned in the Assessment Orders. Documents submitted included registered land purchase documents, ledger accounts, transaction details, asset statements, and tax payment records. Despite this, the second respondent alleged non-production of purchase invoices related to maintenance work.

The Additional Government Pleader argued for the dismissal of the Writ Petitions, citing the availability of an alternate remedy before the Deputy Appellate Commissioner under the Act. However, the Court noted a violation of natural justice principles as the documents submitted by the petitioner were not considered adequately. The Court emphasized that if any deficiencies were found, the petitioner should have been given an opportunity to rectify them. The Assessment Orders were set aside, and the cases were remitted back to the second respondent for fresh consideration within three months. The petitioner was granted 30 days to submit additional documents or representations.

In conclusion, the Writ Petitions were disposed of without costs, and connected Miscellaneous Petitions were closed. The Court's decision focused on upholding principles of natural justice and ensuring proper consideration of the petitioner's submissions in the assessment process.