Home Case Index All Cases VAT and Sales Tax VAT and Sales Tax + HC VAT and Sales Tax - 2014 (5) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (5) TMI 334 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxValidity of DC Order – u/s 22 r/w Section 21 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act and Section 9(2) of the CST Act - Whether order dated 25.11.2011 is beyond the scope of Section 22 – withdrawal of the notice - Held That:- Judgment in Deva Metal Powders (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner, Trade Tax, Uttar Pradesh [2007 (12) TMI 221 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] followed - Mistake which is rectifiable u/s 22 is the mistake which is apparent from the record - Similar view was taken in Mepco Industries Ltd. Vs. CIT and another [2009 (11) TMI 24 - SUPREME COURT] - Mistake apparent on the face of record - to attract the application of section 22, mistake must be apparent on the record and obvious mistake - Mistake existed since DC withdrew the notice for re-assessment both for Central and State by order dated 24.2.2011, whereas in the order dated 24.2.2011 only the re-assessment of provincial i.e. 27.4.2004 was considered and neither the facts, grounds given in the order dated 23.4.2004 for re-assessment of Central were adverted to nor the grounds given in the composite notice dated 20.11.2010 were adverted hence, the mistake was there and it was apparent on the record - Thus, no error was committed by DC in rectifying the mistake. Supply of SIB report – Violation of Natural Justice – Held that:- As the materials pertaining to inquiry and investigation of Forms-C and the result of inquiry were on the record of file, to which the petitioner was made aware, he cannot complain the violation of principle of natural justice - Although there is nothing on record to show as to whether any specific order has been passed on the said application, however, in view of the findings that the assessee was made aware of materials on record, the said complaint was substantially dealt with – Relying upon City Corner Vs. Personal Assistant to Collector and Addl. District Magistrate , Nellore, [1975 (9) TMI 169 - SUPREME COURT] - It is not always necessary that documents asked for to be furnished, provided substance of the document is furnished and summary is not misleading -Further in the counter affidavit filed by the State in writ petition Nos. 635(Tax) of 2004 and 636 (Tax) of 2004, all necessary correspondences received from tax authority of State and outside State were already brought on record, which were basis for issuing re-assessment proceedings thus, the petitioner was made well aware of the entire materials which have been utilised against him - Thus, petitioner's complaint that principle of natural justice has been violated, cannot be accepted. Availability of Statutory remedy – Held That: - The order of re-assessment for the year 2000-01 dated 15.12.2011, which was based on similar allegations, was challenged by the petitioner in this court by filing Writ Tax No. 257 of 2012 - The said writ petition was dismissed on 29.3.2012 - Against the order of re-assessment, assessee has statutory remedy of appeal and which was one of the grounds for dismissing the writ petition – Thus, the petitioner is not entitled for any relief in this writ petition – Decided against assessee.
|