2013 (11) TMI 1514 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Court orders petitioner to produce books for verification in VAT challenge. Rectification request denied; endorsement quashed.

The court directed the petitioner to appear with the books of accounts for verification in response to the challenge to the order passed under section ... Rectification of mistake - Held that:- Admittedly, the petitioner did not produce the books of accounts pursuant to the notice issued by the respondent in reassessment proceedings under section 39(1) of the Act. The petitioner thereafter filed an application dated November 11, 2013, seeking declined of the reassessment order. By endorsement dated November 14, 2013, the request for rectification has not been entertained by stating that as the petitioner had not produced the books of accounts for verification nor responded to the notice issued under section 39(1) of the Act and the reassessment has been made having no other alternative. The endorsement issued for rectification shows that there are no apparent mistakes in the reassessment order and therefore, the application for rectification cannot be considered. - As the reassessment order as well as the endorsement impugned in these writ petitions have been passed without looking into the books of accounts, the only relief that could be granted to the petitioner is, to permit its representative to appear before the respondent-authority, so that its application seeking rectification could be considered after verifying the books of accounts to be produced by the petitioner - Matter remanded back - Decided in favour of assessee. Issues:1. Challenge to the order passed under section 39(1) of the Karnataka Value Added Tax, 2003.2. Non-production of books of accounts by the petitioner.3. Request for rectification of reassessment order.4. Consideration of rectification application without verifying books of accounts.5. Relief sought by the petitioner for rectification.Analysis:1. The judgment deals with the challenge to the order passed under section 39(1) of the Karnataka Value Added Tax, 2003. The petitioner did not produce the books of accounts in response to the notice issued by the respondent in reassessment proceedings. The petitioner sought rectification of the reassessment order, which was declined by the respondent as the books of accounts were not produced for verification. The court directed the petitioner to appear before the respondent with the books of accounts for verification, and the respondent was instructed to consider the rectification application within two weeks from the specified date.2. The non-production of books of accounts by the petitioner was a crucial issue in the case. The court noted that the reassessment order and the endorsement were passed without examining the books of accounts. The petitioner requested an opportunity to produce the books for verification. Consequently, the court quashed the endorsement and directed the petitioner to present the books of accounts before the respondent for consideration of the rectification application.3. The petitioner filed an application seeking rectification of the reassessment order, which was not entertained by the respondent due to the non-production of books of accounts. The court acknowledged the petitioner's request for rectification and directed the respondent to review the application after verifying the books of accounts. The court emphasized the importance of considering the rectification application in light of the verified records.4. The court highlighted the significance of verifying the books of accounts before making a reassessment decision. It noted that the reassessment order and the endorsement were issued without examining the books of accounts, leading to the quashing of the endorsement. The court emphasized the need for proper verification of records before making any decisions related to reassessment or rectification.5. The relief sought by the petitioner was primarily related to the rectification of the reassessment order. The court granted the petitioner the opportunity to present the books of accounts for verification and directed the respondent to consider the rectification application within a specific timeframe. The court also instructed that the reassessment order should not be enforced until the rectification application is disposed of, ensuring a fair and thorough review process for the petitioner's request.