9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (8) TMI 296X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... section 27 of the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003 ?" For considering the same, we may refer to the facts of the case. 2. The appellant herein is a private limited company dealing in the business of dyes and chemicals and for the same purpose, the appellant had obtained TIN number from the VAT Authority. It is the case of the appellant that the TIN number granted by the authority came to be canceled by the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Tax, RangeIII, Ahmedabad vide order dated 14.03.2014 in exercise of powers under section 100 and section 27(5)(i) of the VAT Act. The said cancellation was based upon the main ground that two dealers with whom the appellant has dealt with in past, their TIN numbers have been canceled by the department ab initio and based upon that, the authority has passed an order dated 14.03.2014 with respect to the present appellant. Feeling aggrieved by the said order passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Commercial Tax, First Appeal came to be filed before Joint Commissioner of Commercial Tax by the present appellant, who, according to the appellant, without entering into merits of the case, had disposed of the appeal vide order dated 21.08.2014 only on th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Court that if the Commissioner intends to cancel or suspend the registration of any dealer under section 27(5) or 27(5A) of the Act, then first of all, there must be a reflection of intention of the Commissioner to cancel the registration and secondly, to implement that intention, it is required to communicate form No.104 as prescribed under rule 10(3) of the rules. The counsel submitted that the word 'shall' which has been mentioned in this rule is giving mandate to the authority to comply with this procedure of issuance of form No.104. By drawing attention to this rule, it is submitted by the counsel that the Deputy Commissioner while passing the original order, has not followed this procedure which has been provided under the statutory rules and therefore, this aspect having lost sight of the Tribunal, the order deserves to be corrected. Learned counsel further submitted and drawn the attention of the Court about effect of rule 21, subrule 4(b) of the rules, which again deals with an issue that whether the registration of any dealer is to be canceled on the ground referred to under subsection (5) of section 27, then the last monthly form, or as the case may be, quart ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o the notice of the appellant about this fact and granted effective opportunity. The appellant could have anticipated the ultimate outcome upon it. Learned counsel submitted that even if no opportunity at the relevant point of time is granted on the issue of cancellation of registration, then also, there is a substantial knowledge passed on to appellant, therefore compliance of principles of natural justice and the appellant could have anticipated the outcome of the said proceedings. Therefore, simply because no opportunity is given qua the issue of cancellation of registration, it would make no difference as authorities below have considered the case of the appellant examined and has arrived at a conclusion that the appellant was engaged in billing activity. It was also contended by the learned AGP that the appellant dealt with those two dealers as named above, whose TIN numbers have been canceled ab initio and therefore also, granting of opportunity would not make any difference so far as ultimate decision arrived at by the authority is concerned and therefore, learned AGP submitted that there is a substantial compliance of natural justice and effective opportunity is granted, he ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ancellation of registration. If we read rule 21, subrule (4b) of the VAT Act it also refers to a certain procedure to be observed before taking decision with respect to cancellation or suspension of registration. From the record, it appears that the authority before canceling the registration of the appellant, has not observed this specific procedure as contained under the relevant rules referred above. It is settled position of law that if the statute commands the authority to do a particular act in a particular manner only, the authority is expected legitimately to undertake such act in that particular manner only. Here while passing the impugned orders, learned counsel for the appellant has rightly pointed out and which is emerging from record that before cancellation of registration, no such procedure as prescribed by the statute, is observed. 7. It is also worth to be taken note of that principles of natural justice is applicable in whole range of exercise of powers, either it is administrative, quasijudicial, or judicial. Here the record suggests that so far as the issue pertaining to cancellation of registration is concerned, the appellant has never been put to notice. Had ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
