9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (5) TMI 777X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) deleting the order of assessing officer charging enhanced composition amount and interest on the basis of subsequent notification making amendment in the Composition Scheme? (ii) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Rajasthan Tax Board has not acted illegally and perversely in holding that the notification amending the Composition Scheme cannot be given effect on the existing dealers having composition certificate?" 2. These sales tax revision petitions have come up assailing the order passed by the Rajasthan Tax Board, Ajmer, dated December 24, 2008 rejecting appeals filed by the petitioner-Department. Since common facts and question of law are involved in all these sales tax revisio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2002 and Notification No. 1703: F.4(4) FD/Tax-Div/99-pt-65 dated June 28, 2003 whereby, even all those dealers, who opted for Composition Scheme with effect from 1999 had to shell out some more additional amount in the light of the subsequent notifications. 5. It is an admitted fact that the assessing officer passed an order in the case of S.B. Sales Tax Revision Petition No. 154 of 2009 (ACTO, Alwar v. Radhika Jewellers, Bajaja Bazar, Alwar) on August 2, 2004 modifying the order and intimating the assessee-respondents that in the light of the notifications dated March 22, 2002 and June 28, 2003, the amount payable is worked to Rs. 9,100 and after adjustment of the amount paid as per Composition Scheme, which comes to Rs. 7,560 an additio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as prevailing on it was brought into in year 1999, was slightly modified and since there was a retrospective operation of the said Scheme, therefore, the assessing officer-the petitioner was correct and justified in levying the additional tax by passing an assessment order, which is well reasoned. The petitioner-Department was bound by the notifications and he correctly came to the conclusion while passing the order impugned and thus he pleaded that both, the Rajasthan Tax Board, Ajmer, as well as the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) were not justified in quashing the claim of the petitioner when it is as per the amendments brought into and duly conveyed through press release and other modes by the Government of Rajasthan. Accordingly, he plea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... overnment Treasury account and informing the assessing officer and once he complied with these directives as contained in the Scheme, therefore, nothing further was to be done by the respondentsassessees. It is surprising that how without a proper show-cause notice, additional amount of tax could be imposed on the respondents-assessees in the light of subsequent two notifications referred to hereinabove. Even if two subsequent notifications were brought in by amendments then, it is trite law that a person has to be heard prior to imposition of any tax liability or otherwise. No person can be condemned unheard and it is settled proposition that in all such cases, principles of natural justice have to be followed particularly in fiscal laws, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
