TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 904X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oyan, JJ. For Appellant : Mr.V.Sundareswaran For Respondent : Mr.V.Haribabu, AGP (T) JUDGMENT ( Delivered by S. Manikumar, J. ) Challenge in this writ appeal is to the order of the writ court dated 21.12.2017 made in W.P. No.33485 of 2017, by which, the writ court, dismissed the writ petition as not maintainable, with liberty to the appellant herein/writ petitioner, to file an appeal as against the impugned order, on or before 12.01.2018 and that if such appeal is filed within the said date, the appeal shall not be rejected on the ground of limitation. 2. The facts of the case of the appellant, are that M/s.Delphi Automative Systems P Ltd., is a registered dealer on the files of the Commercial Taxes department since 2009 having its Registered Office at Mumbai. It is engaged in manufacture and supply of customized Automotive Systems, namely electronics and safety parts for various automobile customers. For manufacturing customized automotive components, purchases raw materials (i) locally from registered dealers, (ii) inter-State and (iii) import. 3. All the purchases so made are accounted for, in the regular books of accounts maintained by the appellant, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ngs of the respondent were contested. Before the Assessing Officer, the appellant has also pleaded that when there was no tax evasion or omission to include taxable purchases, estimation made by him, is arbitrary, more so, when sales reported and tax paid, which was accepted in the order of assessment. 6. It is the case of the appellant that without adverting to the above, the respondent has rejected the objections and passed orders demanding huge tax, arbitrarily, by estimating the alleged sales suppression, ignoring the fact that sales turnover was already declared and tax paid, and contrary to the above, imposed penalty, under Section 27(4), which relates to the reversal of input tax credit. 7. Being aggrieved by the order of the respondent, W.P. No.33485 of 2017 has been filed on the ground of violation of principles of natural justice, unreasonableness, arbitrariness, abuse of process of law and ultravires of the provisions of the Act. 8. After hearing the arguments of both sides, Writ court, on 21.12.2017, passed the following order. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner made elaborate submissions to justify the ground of challenge that the respondent is not em ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rit court has ignored the settled law that the inter-state and import purchases are not taxable under the Act, which is also not disputed by the respondent; that the writ court ought to have appreciated the fact that when the respondent had accepted the declaration of inter-state and import purchases, in Form WW, cannot ignore the sale of the customised manufactured goods, declared, in the very same form WW, filed by the appellant; that the writ court ought to have seen that the action of the respondent, in treating the purchases, as suppression and imposing tax, by adding gross profit, to the purchase turnover, amounts to double taxation; that the writ court ought to have held that the impugned order was per se, arbitrary, illegal, unreasonable, amounts to abuse of process of law, for the reason that when the respondent has not disputed the fact that the goods purchased by way of inter-state and import were used in the manufacture of customized goods, which were sold locally and declared in the returns and tax paid, the result is estopped from treating the inter-state and import purchases, as suppression; that the writ court has failed to consider that the respondent, as a quasi-j ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) - Disposal of cases - Meeting with Government Advocate - Certain guidelines and circular instructions issued. ********* 1.During the course of the meeting with the Law Officers of Madras High Court on 30.01.2014, it has been represented by them, that many Assessing Officers are passing orders without giving reasonable opportunity to dealers and violating the Principles of natural justice, which has resulted in mounting numbers of Writ Petitions in the High Court leading to interim stay restraining the authorities proceeding further pursuant to the orders passed. After a considerable period, the Writ petitions were disposed of by setting aside the assessment proceedings with direction to the authorities to take necessary action in accordance with law. 2.It is also further represented that in some of the cases, objections raised by the dealers on the pre-assessment/revision notices are not property examined/ discussed in the order and assessment orders simply state that the objections filed by the dealers are overruled and proposals are confirmed . Such type of orders will not also stand in the test of law. Further, where there is a provision in the Act ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Act. c) Filling of Tax case (R): In regard to filing of Tax Case (Revision), the time limit to file Tax Case is 90 days from the date of receipt of the order STAT by the Addl.State Representative. A delay of 90 days in filing tax case beyond the first 90 days can be condoned by the High Court. In such cases, a delay condone petition should also be filed along with the Tax Case (Revision). If the delay in filing tax case is beyond 90 days (i.e) 90+90=180 days), the Tax Case will not be admitted and it will be dismissed as barred by limitation. So, the Joint Commissioners are requested to file Tax Case Revision well within the period of permissible delay. Wherever necessary, all the Territorial Joint Commissioners including Chennai and Coimbatore divisions are instructed to file Dummy as per the standing instructions issued by the CC to avoid limitation. d) Filing or WP/WA/TC: A review petition on the order of writ petition/writ Appeal/Tax Case (Revision) may be filed before the High Court within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of the order of High Court, if there is any fresh facts which have not been brought to the notice of the High Court ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on'ble Division Bench of this court, held as follows: 27. We also hold, in the facts and circumstances of this case, the impugned order by way of revision of assessment should not have been passed without giving the assessee an opportunity of personal hearing. But since the same has been denied, the impugned order is hereby quashed. 28. We, therefore, allow the appeals and are constrained to hold that the learned Judge of the writ court was not correct in his conclusion in dismissing the writ petitions, inter alia, on the ground of non-exhaustion of alternative remedy in the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above. The judgment of the learned Judge is set aside. 29. We, therefore, direct that the appellant/petitioner must appear before the second respondent in these appeals, who passed the impugned order, within a period of seven days from the date of getting a certified copy of this judgment and thereupon, the second respondent will fix the personal date of hearing in which the appellant must appear and the hearing should be concluded within two weeks thereafter. After such hearing is concluded, the second respondent is at liberty to pass orders in a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
