Home Case Index All Cases VAT and Sales Tax VAT and Sales Tax + HC VAT and Sales Tax - 2021 (6) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (6) TMI 1055 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxValidity of assessment order - assessments were not completed, by operation of law as per the amendment under Section 22(2) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 - deemed assessments - allegation is that the impugned orders were (passed) without any jurisdiction - HELD THAT:- The petitioner has questioned the correctness of the reassessment order dated 16.11.2016 and 08.12.2016 for the Assessment Years 2008-2009 and 2009-2010 under the provisions of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 respectively. For the purpose of assessment under the provisions of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 has been made applicable. The petitioner had been issued with notices dated 28.12.2011 for the assessment year 2008-2009 and notice dated 06.11.2014 wherein the petitioner was called upon to furnish Form C in respect of which the petitioner had paid Central Sales Tax at concessional rate of duty under Section 8 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. Though, notices were issued to the petitioner on the date mentioned above, the petitioner however failed to respond the same. It is not clear why the petitioner failed to furnish the records earlier to substantiate sale effected to register dealers outside the State against Form C. It is also not clear as to why, the petitioner did not respond to the notices issued earlier even though the respondent has filed documents/postal acknowledgments evidencing service of the respective notices issued to the petitioner calling upon the petitioner to file Form C - from the documents that have been filed before this Court, what is discernible is that the petitioner has attempted to take advantage of alleged fire accident on 13.08.2012 in one of its godown and the flood that ravaged the city of Chennai in November-December, 2015 to its advantage. Barring an averment in the affidavit, there is no document to substantiate the fire accident. There is also no explanation forthcoming from the petitioner as to why the documents were not furnished earlier even though notices were served on the petitioner - there was no excuse for the petitioner to not to file Form C. It cannot shy away from its statutory liability and responsibility to establish that the transactions in respect of which claimed concession Inter-State sale against Form C to registered dealers outside the State of Tamil Nadu and still not file the same. In the present case, though reassessment notice dated 28.12.2011 was served for the Assessment Year 2008-2009 to the petitioner, by virtue of the fiction introduced in proviso to Section 22 (2) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act 2006, there was deemed assessment on 30.06.2012 - the respondent could only issue a notice under section 27 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 to revise the deemed assessment. However, the respondent has proceeded to pass the impugned orders dated 14.11.2016 and 08.12.2016 as if the old provisions were in force. The impugned orders which stands quashed now by this order shall be treated as notice issued to the petitioner under section 27 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 for the respective assessment years - Petition disposed off.
|