Home Case Index All Cases VAT and Sales Tax VAT and Sales Tax + HC VAT and Sales Tax - 2016 (3) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (3) TMI 693 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxRectification petition - Re-determination of total and taxable turnover - Suppression of turnover as three different figures on three different dates were furnished - Opportunity of personal hearing not provided before taking note of original record, hence, violation of principles of natural justice and perversity of finding - Held that:- the Tribunal had not violated any principle of natural justice as it was the assessee, who invited the attention of the Tribunal to the balance sheet. The Tribunal was not supposed to get into the document and confront the revision petitioner with the discrepancies between the figures found in the balance sheet and what was furnished to the Team of Enforcement Wing. Once a party before a quasi judicial Tribunal, voluntarily invites the attention of the Tribunal to a document, the Tribunal is entitled to come to its own conclusion from what was produced. It is not part of the principles of natural justice to expect the Tribunal to confront the person producing the document with what is found by the Tribunal. Therefore, there is not any violation of principles of natural justice. For the grievance relating to perversity of findings, it is necessary to take note of the 3 grounds with which the petitioner has gone before the Tribunal seeking rectification. If we compare the grounds of attack in these revision petitions with the paragraphs from the rectification petitions, which have extracted, it could be seen that primarily the attack on perversity of finding, revolves around the 3 facts. So, the revision petitioner should in all fairness pursue the rectification petitions and get verdict on the same. Assuming that the Tribunal rejects the petitions for rectification, it is not as though the petitioner is without a remedy. Assuming that the Tribunal allows the rectification petitions, but sustains the findings, even then, the doors are not shut for the assessee. If the rectification petitions are allowed, but the ultimate conclusion is sustained, the reasoning and the conclusion may not go in tandem. Therefore, The question of perversity cannot be examined at this stage when the petitions for rectification are pending from 2014. - Petition disposed of
|