2018 (12) TMI 1092 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Validity of assessment order - lack of Jurisdiction - Principles of natural justice - Held that - On a perusal of the objections given by the assessee dated 24.2.2017 it is clear that the assessee was fully aware as to what is the case they have to meet. Therefore we are of the view that it cannot be stated that there had been violation of the principles of natural justice. On a reading of the assessment orders dated 28.7.2017 it is found that the Assessing Officer had given reasons which in his opinion would justify his action in adding 25% to the assessee s reported turnover - the assessee cannot contend that there had been violation of the principles of natural justice. Jurisdiction - Held that - Undoubtedly Section 27 of the State Enactment empowers the respondent to revise the assessments. The assessee s case before us is not questioning the jurisdiction of the respondent under Section 27 of the State Enactment but as to the manner in which he has exercised his jurisdiction and the effect of the assessments which had attained finality in the State of Andhra Pradesh wherein the assessee s marketing companies have been assessed and the turnover have been exempted. There is no error in the said impugned common order passed by the learned Single Judge in dismissing the said writ petitions and simultaneously granting liberty to the assessee to file appeals before the First Appellate Authority - appeal dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
Challenging assessment orders under Central Sales Tax Act and Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act on grounds of jurisdiction and natural justice.

Analysis:

Jurisdiction Issue:
The appellant challenged assessment orders for 2014-15 and 2015-16 under the Central Sales Tax Act and Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, citing lack of jurisdiction and violation of natural justice. The Single Judge dismissed the writ petitions, allowing the appellant to file statutory appeals. The appellant argued that the Single Judge's finding was contradictory, pointing out specific paragraphs in the order. The appellant contended that the Assessing Officer's reliance on decisions from Andhra Pradesh for assessing the appellant's marketing company in Andhra Pradesh was without jurisdiction. However, the Government Pleader argued that the Assessing Officer had the power to revise assessments under the State Enactment.

Natural Justice Issue:
The appellant claimed a violation of natural justice due to the Assessing Officer adding 25% to the turnover without proper jurisdiction. The respondent argued that the appellant was fully aware of the case and had opportunities for personal hearings. The appellant also objected to the Assessing Officer's reference to a decision from Andhra Pradesh without prior notice. The Court found that the appellant was aware of the case and had opportunities to present their objections, concluding that there was no violation of natural justice.

Final Decision:
The Court upheld the Single Judge's decision, stating that there was no error in dismissing the writ petitions. The appellant was granted 30 days to file appeals before the First Appellate Authority without concerns about the limitation period. The respondent was directed not to take coercive action against the appellant during this period. The Court found no grounds for interference and dismissed the writ appeals, along with connected CMPs, without costs.

This detailed judgment addressed the issues of jurisdiction and natural justice thoroughly, providing a comprehensive analysis of the appellant's contentions and the respondent's arguments, ultimately upholding the Single Judge's decision and providing directions for the appellant to pursue statutory appeals.