Definite information and adequate opportunity justified reassessment; concurrent findings were not disturbed absent perversity.

Reassessment under the Haryana Value Added Tax Act was sustained because the dealer was confronted with definite information from transport records, the sales tax barrier register, impounded documents, and bill details, yet did not produce books of account or an effective reply. The Court held that the plea of denial of reasonable opportunity was unsupported by the record and that the Tribunal's concurrent findings were neither illegal nor perverse. In the absence of perversity or any substantial question of law, the reassessment and consequential penalty findings were not interfered with in appeal.

---

---

Issues: Whether the reassessment and penalty proceedings under section 31 and section 48 of the Haryana Value Added Tax Act, 2003 were vitiated for want of definite information, denial of reasonable opportunity, or perversity in the concurrent findings.

Analysis: The Court found that the reassessing authority had confronted the dealer with the material collected from transport records and the sales tax barrier register, along with the impounded documents and bill details. The dealer was given sufficient opportunity to rebut the information and to produce books of account, but neither the books nor an effective reply to the notice were furnished. The Tribunal's concurrent findings that the case rested on definite information and not on mere suspicion, and that the plea of denial of opportunity was unsupported by the record, were not shown to be illegal or perverse. In these circumstances, no substantial question of law arose for interference in appeal.

Conclusion: The reassessment was upheld and the challenge to the penalty and other consequential findings failed.

Final Conclusion: The appeal was dismissed in view of the concurrent factual findings that the assessee had been afforded adequate opportunity and that the reassessment was founded on definite information.

Ratio Decidendi: Where reassessment is based on definite information confronted to the dealer and adequate opportunity is afforded to rebut it, concurrent findings of fact will not be interfered with in appeal absent perversity or a substantial question of law.

---