TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>High Court quashes assessment orders for 1997-98 & 1998-99, stresses independent assessment by quasi-judicial authorities.</h1> <h3>Madras Granites (P) Ltd. Versus Commercial Tax Officer, Arisipalayam Circle, Salam and another</h3> The High Court allowed both writ petitions, quashing the assessment orders for the years 1997-98 and 1998-99. The court emphasized the necessity for ... - Issues involved: Challenge to orders of Tamil Nadu Taxation Special Tribunal for assessment years 1997-98 and 1998-99.For the assessment year 1997-98: The premises of the dealer were inspected by the Enforcement Wing of the Commercial Tax Department. Deputy Commissioner (CT), Enforcement, forwarded a proposal (D-3) to the assessing officer for assessment, including determining surplus turnover and penalty. The Assistant Commissioner (CT), Enforcement, directed the assessing officer to complete the assessment based on the D-3 proposal. The assessing officer did not independently apply his mind but followed the directions, leading to unsustainable assessments. The High Court held that the assessing officer, as a quasi-judicial authority, is not bound by higher authorities' directions in completing assessments. The court quashed the assessment orders and the Special Tribunal's confirmation, allowing the assessing officer to reassess in accordance with the law after giving the petitioner an opportunity.For the assessment year 1998-99: Similar to the previous year, the assessing officer relied on the D-3 proposal and directions from higher authorities without independent assessment. The High Court reiterated that the assessing officer must exercise quasi-judicial functions independently, not bound by superiors' directions. Consequently, the court quashed the assessment orders and the Special Tribunal's confirmation, granting the assessing officer the opportunity to reassess following due process.Conclusion: The High Court allowed both writ petitions, quashing the assessment orders for both years and directing reassessment by the assessing officer in compliance with the law, emphasizing the need for independent assessment by quasi-judicial authorities.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
