Court allows writ petition, sets aside assessment order for 2010-11, and remits for fresh assessment.

The court allowed the writ petition, set aside the revised assessment order for the year 2010-11, and remitted the matter back to the respondent for a fresh assessment. The petitioner was directed to cooperate in providing necessary documents and attending a personal hearing, while the respondent was instructed to decide promptly and in compliance with the law.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to revised assessment order for the year 2010-11 based on rejection of form C submission within the quarter and absence of personal hearing opportunity.

Analysis:
The petitioner contested the revised assessment order for the year 2010-11, arguing that as a sale was made to a registered dealer, they were entitled to pay concessional tax at two per cent under section 8(1) of the Central Sales Tax Act. The petitioner submitted form C, but it was rejected by the respondent as it was not submitted within the quarter as per section 8(4) of the Sales Tax Act. The petitioner relied on rule 10(2) of the Central Sales Tax (Tamil Nadu) Rules, 1957, to support their claim that the declaration form in form C could be produced before the final assessment of the accounts for that year.

The petitioner requested the respondent to restrict form C towards sales in the first quarter and paid the tax difference accordingly. Despite seeking a personal hearing in their reply, the respondent passed the revised assessment order levying tax at four per cent on the entire amount. Citing a Division Bench judgment, the petitioner argued that the order should be set aside as the request for a personal hearing was not considered before passing the revised assessment order.

The respondent contended that form C was rejected due to non-submission within the quarter, but acknowledged the authority's power to extend the time for submission. The respondent agreed to redo the assessment for the year 2010-11 considering the circumstances.

The court, after considering the submissions, set aside the impugned order based on the Division Bench judgment's precedent. The court directed the matter to be reconsidered, allowing the petitioner to submit any required documents within fifteen days and appear for a personal hearing. The respondent was instructed to review form C and make a fresh decision promptly, ensuring compliance with the law.

In conclusion, the court allowed the writ petition, overturned the impugned order, and remitted the matter back to the respondent for a fresh assessment. The petitioner was directed to cooperate in providing any necessary documents and attending a personal hearing, with the respondent instructed to decide on the matter expeditiously and in accordance with the law.

---