Home Case Index All Cases VAT and Sales Tax VAT and Sales Tax + HC VAT and Sales Tax - 2013 (5) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (5) TMI 777 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURTDemand of tax - Composition Scheme - assessing officer intimated the assessee-respondents that in the light of the notifications dated March 22, 2002 and June 28, 2003, the amount payable is worked to ₹ 9,100 and after adjustment of the amount paid as per Composition Scheme, which comes to ₹ 7,560 an additional amount of ₹ 1,540 was levied on the respondents - prior to issuance of the said assessment order, no notice whatsoever was issued to the respondents-assessees and straightway, assessment order as aforesaid was passed creating an additional tax liability - held that:- Vide notification dated May 7, 1999, the Composition Scheme was brought into force for registered Sarafa dealers other than MMTC Ltd., RBI or SBI or any other bank or any other corporate body, dealing in bullion, articles, ornaments and jewellery made of gold and silver notified under section 5 of the Act of 1994, which came into force with effect from April 1, 1999. The said Scheme was for a limited period of five years and all the respondents herein opted for the said Scheme and thus availed of benefits arising out of the said Composition Scheme. It is surprising that how without a proper show-cause notice, additional amount of tax could be imposed on the respondents-assessees in the light of subsequent two notifications referred to hereinabove. Even if two subsequent notifications were brought in by amendments then, it is trite law that a person has to be heard prior to imposition of any tax liability or otherwise. No person can be condemned unheard and it is settled proposition that in all such cases, principles of natural justice have to be followed particularly in fiscal laws, where without any proper show-cause notice, no liability can be inflicted upon the other side. Therefore, Tax Board as well as the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) both have merely quashed the order passed by the assessing-officer on the prime issue that no notice was issued by the assessing-officer prior to imposition of the said additional tax. It was the duty of the assessing-officer to convey to the respondentsassessees and bring into their knowledge about the subsequent two notifications. One, who opted for Composition Scheme and complying with the directives of the said Scheme paying regular tax for 5 years during which period, the Composition Scheme was applicable then, if there was a sudden change in the amendment or a fresh notification then, it ought to be conveyed to the other side. - Since both the notifications curtailed the right of the respondents-assessees, according to me, by no stretch of imagination, they can be said to retrospective and thus they can be said to be prospective in nature only. Right conferred by the statute for some beneficial scheme cannot be curtailed by later notifications when the same benefits have accrued to the assessees and given by the Department. All necessary benefits ought to have been given its due till the period of scheme, which arise out of the said scheme. - Decided against Revenue.
|