Home Case Index All Cases VAT and Sales Tax VAT and Sales Tax + HC VAT and Sales Tax - 2014 (6) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (6) TMI 558 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxViolation of principle of natural justice - Whether the first respondent has passed the order under Section 22 (2) or 27 (2) of TNVAT Act and whether the requirement to afford an opportunity of personal hearing is different from issuing a show cause notice as contemplated under Section 27 (2) of the said Act - Held that:- As per Section 88 (3) (i) of the TNVAT Act, which deals with repeal and saving, it was provided that the amendment or repeal shall not affect the previous operation of the said Act or 1970 Act, as the case may be, or any right, privilege, obligation or liability already acquired, accrued or incurred thereunder and subject thereto, anything done or any action taken including any appointment made, any notification, notice or order issued, any rule or regulation framed or forms prescribed and any certificate, licence, or permit granted in exercise of any power conferred by or under the said Act or 1970 Act, as the case may be, shall be valid and always as deemed to have been valid, during the period the said Act or 1970 Act, as the case may be was in force notwithstanding the repeal of the said Act or 1970 Act as the case may be. Therefore, even the Circular issued by the Commissioner will be applicable in this case. Thus, Section 16 (1) is in para materia of Section 27 of TNVAT Act. Even if the argument advanced on behalf of the respondents is accepted that personal hearing need not be given, when such an opportunity of hearing is specifically sought, it has to be extended to the petiitoner. The quasi judicial powers conferred on the assessing officer has to be exercised in a judicious, fair and objective manner without arbitrariness and subject to the rules of natural justice, including grant of personal hearing and recording of reasons for conclusions ultimately arrived at before rejection of an application for exemption or waiver or stay and the non-adherence to the aforesaid principle will offend Article 14 of the Constitution of India and also renders the very remedy available to the assessee a nugatory. Whether it is application of Section 22 (2) or 27 (1) of the Act, the petitioner ought to have granted an opportunity of personal hearing, when he has specifically sought for the same. Inasmuch as such principle was not adhered to in this case, the impugned orders in WP Nos. 9077 to 9079 of 2014 cannot be sustained. It is also to be mentioned that according to the petitioner, they are in possession of voluminious documents running to 16,09,190 pages of photostat copies and therefore they have produced some sample documents. At least, at that stage, the assessing officer ought to have afforded an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner for perusal of such volumnious documents. The non-consideration of the same vitiates the impugned orders. Even though the impugned orders are quashed, this Court, taking into consideration the demand notices issued by the first respondent are still valid, the effect of quashing the assessment orders will not totally take away the right of the first respondent to proceed further in the matter. Further, taking note of the fact that the transaction reported by the petitioner is huge, pertaining to foreign sale, which according to the petitioner is totally exempted, the question of deposit of any amount will not arise. At the same time, in the impugned orders of assessment, it has been clearly stated that certain documents have been produced in form C and F in which there are lot of differences - If an appeal is filed against the impugned order, it will be a different aspect to be considered. Now, by virtue of this order, the first respondent is directed to re-consdier the entire matter afresh. At the same time, the revenue also has to be safeguarded to some extent. In that view of the matter, out of the demand of ₹ 2,400/- crores made by the revenue in the impugned orders of assessment, the petitioner is directed to deposit 10% of the tax amount thereof as a pre-condition for reviving the orders of assessment. This amount shall be depsoited by the petitioner within a period of eight weeks - decided partly in favour of assessee.
|