9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (2) TMI 1315X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o initiate revision proceedings who at his own motion can call the pending as well as disposed of proceedings by the subordinate authority. Normally interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is not made in the cases where there is alternative statutory remedy available, more so against challenge to show cause notice or assessment order directly. The law is well-settled that exception can be given to the self imposed restriction, for enforcement of fundamental right in case of violation of principles of natural justice, the proceedings are without jurisdiction or vires are challenged. The facts are not disputed, admittedly, the notice is beyond limitation and it is in these circumstances that interference is made in the writ petition. The impugned notice is set aside - Adjourned to 16.4.2020. - CWP No. 15870 of 2019 - - - Dated:- 19-2-2020 - AVNEESH JHINGAN AND AJAY TEWARI, JJ. Mr. Amit Aggarwal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Ajay Jagga, Senior Panel Counsel for U.T., Chandigarh. ORDER The writ petition has been filed seeking quashing of impugned notice dated 28.5.2019 being time-barred. The assessment year involved in petiti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t of tax payable by any person or any class of persons for such period, as he may specify in his order. (4) An assessment under sub-section (2) or sub-section (3) may be made within three years after the date when the annual statement was filed or due to be filed, whichever is later: PROVIDED THAT where circumstances so warrant, the Commissioner may, by an order in writing, allow assessment of a taxable person or a registered person after three years, but not later than six years, from the date, when annual statement was filed or due to be filed by such person, whichever is later. The said provision was amended vide notification dated 29.6.2016 and following changes were made: Amendment in section 29 of Punjab Act 8 of 2005 6. In the principal Act, in section 29:- (1) for sub-section (4), the following sub-section shall be substituted, namely:- 4) An assessment under sub-section (2) or sub-section (3), may be made within a period of six years after the date when the annual statement was filed or due to be filed, whichever is later: Provided that the assessment under sub-section (2) or subsection (3), in respect of which annual statement for the assessment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iod of limitation of six years would apply to the present cases or not. We are proceeding by assuming that there was period of six years from the date of filing of the annual statement or when it was due. As per Rule 40 of the Punjab Value Added Tax Rules, 2005 (as applicable to Union Territory, Chandigarh), the annual statement is to be filed by 20th November of the year concerned. The last assessment year involved in the bunch is assessment year 2010-11. The annual statement was to be filed by 20.11.2011 and six years expired on 19.11.2017. Admittedly, the notice has been issued on 28.5.2019. It would be relevant to quote the following stand taken by the respondents in the written statement: The case of the petitioner and all other connected cases falls in the category of those assessment orders, which were finalized by committing a fraud and even computer entries were made fraudulently. As such show cause notices were issued as an opportunity to the petitioners to verify the correctness of assessment orders/computer entries and records of petitioners related to framed assessments. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that considering the circumstances, a m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eady an assessment order, there was no occasion to proceed under Section 29(2). From the writs challenging assessment orders, it is apparent that not only the notices under Section 29(2) were issued but the assessments were also framed under Section 29(2) of the Act. The contention of fraud does not enhance the case of the respondents. There is a specific provision, i.e. Section 29(7) authorising to amend the assessment orders in eventuality of fraud etc., in the present cases though reliance has been placed on the said provision, however no action till date is initiated under Section 29(7). Moreover, under Section 65 of the Act, there are supervisory powers with the Commissioner to initiate revision proceedings who at his own motion can call the pending as well as disposed of proceedings by the subordinate authority. Normally interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is not made in the cases where there is alternative statutory remedy available, more so against challenge to show cause notice or assessment order directly. The law is well-settled that exception can be given to the self imposed restriction, for enforcement of fundamental right in case of violatio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
