Home Case Index All Cases VAT and Sales Tax VAT and Sales Tax + HC VAT and Sales Tax - 2023 (6) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (6) TMI 187 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxValidity of assessment order - impugned order passed by the first respondent, as barred by limitation and the same came to be passed without giving any opportunity to the petitioner - principles of natural justice - HELD THAT:- A Full Bench of the Composite High Court for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh in ECIL, after referring to the judgments of (i) The Kerala Education Bill, 1957 [1958 (5) TMI 47 - SUPREME COURT]; (ii) Minerva Mills vs. Union of India [1980 (7) TMI 262 - SUPREME COURT]; and (iii) L. Chandra Kumar vs. Union of India [1997 (3) TMI 90 - SUPREME COURT], held that writ jurisdiction conferred upon the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is part of the inviolable basic structure of the Constitution and any law which seeks to take away or restrict the jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India must be held to be void. From the judgment of Apex Court in Glaxo Smith Kline [2020 (5) TMI 149 - SUPREME COURT], it is very clear that the request of the Petitioner therein came to be rejected mainly on the ground of inability to file an appeal within the prescribed time was not properly substantiated or explained. Further, the Court also observed that the Order of the High Court does not indicate violation of principles of natural justice or non-compliance of statutory requirements in any manner. The Court also held that the Order of assessment does not get merged with the order rejecting the request to condone the delay. In the instant case, the Appellate Authority as well as VAT Tribunal, categorically held that there was sufficient cause for preferring the appeal with delay, but, as they have no power to extend the period of limitation, rejected the appeals. Apart from that, it is also urged that, the assessment order came to be passed without giving an opportunity of hearing and there is no material to show that the show-cause notice was served on the Petitioner. Since, the delay in filing the appeals was explained and the reason given by the Petitioner was accepted, but the delay was not condoned due to limitation prescribed under the Act and as the Assessment Order is said to have passed without giving an opportunity of hearing, more particularly, the non-service of show-cause notice, it is felt a fit case where the matter requires reconsideration. The Writ Petitions are disposed of setting aside the Orders under challenge, in both the writ petitions and the matters are remanded back to the Assessing Authority to deal with the same afresh in accordance with law.
|