Assessment by an unauthorised officer was void for want of jurisdiction under the VAT rules.

For dealers granted registration and assigned a TIN under the Orissa Value Added Tax Rules, 2005, the assessing authority is the assessing authority of the range. An assessment made by a Sales Tax Officer who was not that designated authority was contrary to Rule 34(12)(b) and therefore without jurisdiction. The assessment order was set aside because the statutory scheme vested assessment power only in the specified range authority for that class of dealers.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessment order was without jurisdiction for having been passed by an authority other than the assessing authority of the range in respect of a dealer assigned with TIN under the Orissa Value Added Tax Rules, 2005.

Analysis: Rule 34(12)(b) of the Orissa Value Added Tax Rules, 2005 specifically provides that, for dealers granted registration and assigned a TIN, the assessing authority means the assessing authority of the range. The impugned assessment was passed by the Sales Tax Officer, who was not the assessing authority of the range. In view of this express statutory scheme, the order could not be sustained and was contrary to the governing rule.

Conclusion: The assessment order was without jurisdiction and was set aside.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the statute and rules identify a specific authority for assessment of a class of registered dealers, an assessment made by a different authority is invalid for want of jurisdiction.

---