Home Case Index All Cases VAT and Sales Tax VAT and Sales Tax + HC VAT and Sales Tax - 2019 (7) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (7) TMI 1594 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURTInitiation of proceedings against the petitioners beyond the period of limitation - Section 25(3) of the VAT Act - HELD THAT:- The notices issued on 25.4.16 were in conformity with the provisions of Section 75(1)(b), which empowers the officer not below the rank of Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer to direct the dealer to produce accounts, registers and documents relating to business activities for examination. The subsequent notices were also issued under Section 75(1) of the VAT Act inasmuch as, pursuant to the notice dated 25.4.16, the petitioners-assessees had sought time to produce the record but failed to do so. The proceedings remained pending on account of the petitioners not producing the record. It is not disputed before this court that after the petitioners producing the requisite record, the authority conducting the survey submitted the report to the Deputy Commissioner (Administration), Commercial Taxes, Sriganganagar, and recommended to register the case against them under Section 61 of the VAT Act - the contention of the petitioners that the proceedings against them under Section 25(1) of the VAT Act were initiated after making out the case vide notice dated 25.4.16 purported to be issued under Section 75(1) of the VAT Act, cannot be accepted by this court. Apparently, the notices issued prior to the impugned notices, were the notices issued directing the petitioners to produce the relevant record so as to enable the Assessing Authority to arrive at the conclusion regarding the evasion/avoidance of tax or the petitioners wrongly availing the ITC and the same cannot be construed to be notices issued under Section 25(1) of the VAT Act - the date of notices issued under Section 25(1) of the VAT Act needs to be taken as the date of making out the case against the petitioners and the Assessing Authority would be well within its jurisdiction in passing the assessment order within the period of six months from the date of the said notice, which for the reasons recorded in writing in a particular case may be further extended by the Commissioner for a period not exceeding six months. The notices issued by the Assessing Authority initiating the proceedings against the petitioners cannot be said to have been issued acting without jurisdiction and therefore, the writ petitions deserve to be dismissed.
|