Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2023 (3) TMI 1027

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Haryana Tax Tribunal, Chandigarh (for short "Tribunal") in STA Nos.427 and 428 of 2014-15. 2. The facts relevant for the purpose of disposal of both the appeals are that the appellant-Company is duly registered under Haryana Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (for short "HVAT Act") as well as under Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (for short "CST Act"). It is engaged in the business of manufacturing and sale of self closing valves (SC Valves) and domestic pressure regulators (DPRS) mainly for Oil Marketing Companies related to LPG cylinders, 4 way manifold and adopter vent pipes and their parts. It has opened its sale outlets/branches in several States including Hyderabad, Indore, Mumbai and Kerala where it transfers its manufactured goods as branch tra .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ng assessment proceedings in a scrutiny case was not served on the appellant. The Tribunal after considering the contentions raised by both the sides held that the service of VAT N-2 notice on the assessee was validly effected in accordance with Rule 79 of the Haryana Value Added Tax Rules, 2003 (for short "Rules, 2003") and accordingly, finding no merit in the appeals dismissed the same. 3. Feeling aggrieved, the appellant-assessee has filed the instant VAT appeals challenging the impugned order dated 17.04.2018 passed by the Tribunal. 4. The following questions of law had been posed for consideration:- (i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal and Authorities below were right in holding that notice N- .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t in the subsequent notices issued against the appellant, there was no reference qua issuance of notice and serving of notice VAT N-2 upon the appellant. It was, therefore, urged that the proceedings for scrutiny assessment were not held validly and the same were liable to be declared void ab initio. With these broad arguments, it was submitted that the appeals deserved to be allowed. To fortify his argument, learned counsel for the appellant placed reliance upon authority cited as Daya Ram and Company v. State of Haryana, 2013 (60) VST 241, wherein the notice issued by revenue was received by a friend of the appellant. It was held by a Coordinate Bench of this Court that the notice had not been validly served upon the appellant and serving .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... eliberations to the contentions raised by them. The assessing officer vide order dated 29.03.2013 had framed assessment under Section 15(3) of HVAT Act as well as CST Act to the tune of Rs.34,23,021/- by observing that the appellant-assessee was illegally claiming exemption from HVAT and CST by showing transactions between its sale offices and itself as branch transfers though they were interstate sales and thereby demand of tax was evaded. Against this order, the appellant had filed appeal before JETC (A) on the grounds that no notice for rejection of branch transfer and converting the same into interstate sales was ever given and further that the assessing authority had erred in treating branch transfer as interstate sales. The JETC (A) h .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... taken note of the fact that the above named Sh. Rajeev Kumar had subsequently furnished an affidavit on 17.04.2018 swearing therein that his signatures on statement dated 01.06.2017 was obtained on blank papers. The Tribunal had rejected this plea and in our opinion rightly so in view of the fact that the affidavit so sworn by Sh. Rajiv Kumar was dated 17.04.2018 i.e. only on the day when the appeal by the Tribunal had been decided. The appellant being employer of the above said Sh. Rajeev Kumar can obviously be presumed to be in a dominating position to procure such affidavit. As such, we are inclined to hold that the Tribunal had rightly observed that the statement dated 01.06.2017 was actually made by Sh. Rajeev Kumar before the officers .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates