TMI Blog2021 (7) TMI 841X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the original C and H declaration forms submitted would also deprive the petitioner to claim the difference of tax from the purchaser, if they fail to provide the duly rectified declaration forms and would result in loss to the petitioner - It is settled position of law that whenever declaration forms filed are found to be defective in nature, the authority is duty bound to return the same to the dealer/assessee who filed the same to enable him to rectify such defects. The action of the 1st respondent in rejecting the claim of the petitioner for concessional rate of tax / exemption on the ground of declarations being defective and also not returning the C and H declaration forms to the petitioner to rectify such defects, is highly objectionable and violative of principles of natural justice, resulting in serious prejudice to the petitioner - the action of the 1st respondent in passing the impugned order is in violation of principles of natural justice and calls for interference by this Court. The matter is remitted back to the 1st respondent with a direction to the 1st respondent to return the defective C and H declaration forms to the petitioner by issuing a noti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ondent that out of the C declaration forms filed, by the petitioner earlier at the time of original assessment, two (2) C declaration forms covering Inter State Sale turnover of ₹ 2,16,490/- and one (1) H declaration form covering Export Sale turnover of ₹ 11,48,202/- have not been considered by extending the benefit of concessional rate of tax / exemption on such turnover and sought for reconsideration of the same. 7. It is contended that the 1st respondent by the impugned order, dt.03.03.2021, passed in exercise of powers conferred under Rule 12(7) of the CST Rules, had rejected the said two C forms and one H form submitted by the petitioner earlier covering a turnover of ₹ 2,16,490/- and one H form covering a turnover of ₹ 11,48,202/-, on the ground that these declarations filed by the petitioner are incomplete and being defective, and as such, the exemption claimed by the petitioner cannot be allowed. 8. It is the contention of the petitioner that the action of the 1st respondent in rejecting the C and H forms on the ground of being defective, without pointing out the defect by returning the said declaration forms, and without affor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er did not file declarations covering the turnover on which it claimed either concessional rate of tax or exemption on inter-State sales or export sales. The declaration forms, in form C and H , were filed by the petitioner much prior to the passing of the assessment order originally on 15.03.2020 and the same were available in the record of the 1st respondent. However, the 1st respondent did not take the same into consideration, nor rejected the same while passing the order. 14. It is only after this Court s intervention in such matters that the respondents chose to reopen the assessment completed under Rule 12(7) of the CST Rules to consider the declarations filed or affording an opportunity to the dealer/assessee to file such declarations, since this Court in Godrej Agrovet Ltd., v. CTO, Eluru 41 APSTJ 92 (AP) = (2007) 7 VST 730 , had held that the declaration forms can be filed even subsequent to the date of finalization of the assessments and such declaration forms deserve to be considered. 15. In the facts of the present case also, the 1st respondent had reopened the assessment completed, and ought to have considered the declaration forms filed by the petitioner c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... thority is duty bound to return the same to the dealer/assessee who filed the same to enable him to rectify such defects. 20. In Tirukoilur Oil Mills Ltd., v. State of Madras (1967) 20 STC 388 (Mad.) = AIR 1968 Mad 311, it was held that Even the principles of natural justice require that, when something is discovered even at the appellate stage which exposed the assessee to a higher rate of tax, the dealer should be given an opportunity to rectify the defects within a stipulated time granted for that purpose. 21. In C.S.T. v. Darasha Mancherjee Sons (1981) 47 STC 251 (MP-FB), a Full Bench of Madhya Pradesh High Court held that The rejection of declarations, it is not disputed, will result in denying the dealer the benefit of the concessional rate of tax. The rejection would, therefore, adversely affect a dealer who claimed the benefit of concessional rate. The order of rejection cannot be passed by an assessing authority arbitrarily. It is a quasi-judicial act and it is thus inherent in the very nature of an order, expressly or impliedly rejecting the declaration furnished by the dealer, that it should be passed after giving the dealer an opportunity o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
