9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (8) TMI 535X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... egin from 1st April 2015 and it will end on 31st March 2021. It is for this reason, respondent no.3 knowing very well that 31st March 2021 is a crucial date, has dated the impugned order as 30th March 2021. But the clear give away is the date on which the digital signature is put on the impugned order, and that is 19th April 2021 at 18:14:33 hrs. Therefore, the order of assessment under Sub- Section (5) of Section 23 has been made after the expiry of 6 years from the end of the year and, therefore, the order has been passed without jurisdiction. Petition disposed off - WRIT PETITION NO.2486 OF 2021 - - - Dated:- 5-8-2022 - K.R. SHRIRAM A.S. DOCTOR, JJ Mr. Rahul C. Thakar a/w Mr. Kevin Shah i/b Mr. C. B. Thakar for Petitioners ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s was not received by them. 2. Respondent no.3, thereafter issued the impugned order, whereby petitioner has been found liable to pay dues at Rs.80,84,642/- . Even this was, Mr. Thakar states, not received by petitioner. The order has been noticed only after petitioner started receiving recovery calls from the department. Mr. Thakar states that even the order was sent to GST email-id of petitioner and not on the correct email-id provided for MVAT proceedings. 3. Though Mr. Thakar raised various points including about dates in the impugned order being incorrectly mentioned, the main thrust was that the impugned order has been passed after the expiry of 6 years from the end of the year containing the transaction and, therefore, the orde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... recording in an incorrect manner, any transaction of sale or purchase, or that any claim has been incorrectly made, then in such a case notwithstanding that any notice for assessment has been issued under other provisions of this section or any other section of this Act, the prescribed authority may, after giving such dealer or person a notice in the prescribed form and a reasonable opportunity of being heard, initiate assessment of the dealer or person in respect of such transaction or claim. Provided that, where, - (i) a registered dealer has claimed refund in his last return or a revised return containing last day of the year, or (ii) an auditor has mentioned about eligibility for refund in his audit report under section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... emed to have been transferred to such authority. (c) The assessment proceedings under this sub-section shall be without prejudice to the assessment proceedings in respect of the said period or periods under any other provisions of this Act by any authority who otherwise has the jurisdiction to assess such dealer or person in respect of other transactions of sale or purchase or any other claim which are not covered by clause (a) and clause (b). (d) The assessment under this sub-section shall be made separately in respect of the transaction or claim relating to the said period or periods to the best of the judgment of the prescribed authority where necessary and irrespective of any assessment made under this sub-section, the dealer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 31st March 2015. The six years period, therefore, will begin from 1st April 2015 and it will end on 31st March 2021. It is for this reason, respondent no.3 knowing very well that 31st March 2021 is a crucial date, has dated the impugned order as 30th March 2021. But the clear give away is the date on which the digital signature is put on the impugned order, and that is 19th April 2021 at 18:14:33 hrs. Therefore, the order of assessment under Sub- Section (5) of Section 23 has been made after the expiry of 6 years from the end of the year and, therefore, the order has been passed without jurisdiction. 6. The impugned order has to therefore, be quashed and set aside, which we hereby do. 7. Petition accordingly disposed. 8. No order a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
