9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (9) TMI 969X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... either side, these Writ Petitions are taken up for final disposal. 2. Since the issue involved in both Writ Petitions are identical, Writ Petitions are disposed of by a common order. 3. The petitioner is a registered dealer under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 (TNGST Act). The assessment for the years 1997-1998 and 1991-1992 were completed by orders of assessment, dated 16.10.2000 and 31.10.2000. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred Appeals before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner (C.T)-III, Chennai. The appeals were allowed in part. Thereafter, the Government of Tamil Nadu by G.O.Ms.No.78 Commercial Taxes and Registration Department, dated 01.06.2010, brought about a scheme for settlement of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fter about six months from the date of receipt of the objections filed by the petitioner has rejected the applications by the impugned orders on the ground that the arrears has been disposed of by the Appellate Forum and not pending for collection when the Scheme came into force. 4. After hearing the learned counsel appearing on either side and perusing the materials placed on record, at the very outset it has to be stated that the impugned orders have been passed on account of total non-application of mind and without appreciating the scope and object of the Settlement Act. In fact, I had an occasion to consider a batch of Writ Petitions filed before the Madurai Bench of this Court in W.P.(MD) Nos. 5638 to 8415 of 2014 etc. batch, wherein ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... een mentioned. 22. Therefore, the applicant, while submitting application under Section 5 has to calculate the amount payable as per the rates mentioned in Section 7(a) to (d) and remit the same and file proof of payment along with application. A separate application is required to be filed for each assessment. If any application or revision is pending, then the applicant has to forward the copy of the application to the said authority in terms of Section 5(3). Therefore, at the first instance, the onus lies on the dealer/applicant to determine the payment payable under Section 7. We have noticed that under Section 7, it is a rate applicable for determining the amount payable, which at the first instance is on the dealer/applicant. In ter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h payment along with the application under Section 5, the same will be taken for verification and if the designated authority, on going through the relevant records, finds that further amount is payable and if the same fall short of not more than 10% grant relief to the dealer and if not the application stands summarily rejected. Therefore, the Act operates on strict limits as clearly defined under the Statute. The onus is not only on the dealer to carefully peruse all his records and relevant documents while determining the rate payable by him, but also on the assessing officer while verifying the application as to the correctness of the particulars furnished exercising power, under Section 6(1) by taking into consideration relevant record ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... payment of the amount determined under sub-section (1) to Section 6. Even if the applicant satisfies such requirements, still the designated authority has power to refuse to settle the arrears of tax, penalty or interest by recording reasons in writing after issuing show-cause notice." 6. With regard to the issue as to how the applications have to be dealt with when appeals are pending, it was held in paragraph No.33 as follows:- "33. Regarding the other category of cases, the authority rejected the applications filed under Section 5 also on the ground that the special committee exercising power under Section 16(D) of the Act has set aside the best of judgment assessment orders and remanded the matter to the assessing officer and there i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... z., the Appellate Assistant Commissioner (C.T)-III, Chennai, had allowed the appeals in part, thereby, the assessment for the relevant years 1997-1998 and 1991-1992 should be revised and there was a statutory duty on the part of the Assessing Officer to pass the revised assessment orders and for reasons best known, the Assessing Officer has not done so, therefore, the dealer cannot be blamed for the inaction on the part of the Assessing Officer, therefore, the designated authority under the Settlement Act should call for entire files or in the alternative direct the Assessing Officer to pass revised assessment orders in terms of the orders passed by the Appellate Authority viz., the Appellate Assistant Commissioner (C.T)-III, Chennai, on 20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
