Court quashes tax assessment orders, orders fresh review & compliance.

The court ruled in favor of the petitioner, quashing the assessment orders under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 for the years 2009-10 to 2014-15. The court remitted the matters back to the respondent for fresh consideration, instructing a detailed review of the petitioner's objections, necessary inquiries, provision of a personal hearing, and compliance with the law in reassessing the tax liability. The court found the initial assessment orders lacking detailed examination, deemed them non-speaking, and in violation of principles of natural justice. The case was closed without costs.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to assessment orders under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 for the years 2009-10 to 2014-15.

Analysis:
The petitioner, a developer and civil contractor engaged in promoting apartment complexes, contested assessment orders under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 for the years 2009-10 to 2014-15. The petitioner's business was inspected, and defects were noted, leading to the issuance of notices by the respondent. Despite being unregistered at the time of inspection, the petitioner later registered under the Act. The petitioner argued that they had already paid tax on deemed sales turnover based on the percentage completion method advised by their auditor. They contended that the contract receipt in their balance sheet did not represent receipts from flat buyers, thus should not be considered for tax calculation.

Regarding penalties, the petitioner cited precedents to argue against levying penalties on assessed turnovers found in the dealer's accounts. They emphasized the quasi-judicial role of the Assessing Officer, referencing relevant court decisions. The petitioner requested a personal hearing, which was not granted, and assessments were made without fully considering the petitioner's objections and evidence. The respondent's assessment orders lacked detailed examination and were deemed non-speaking orders, violating principles of natural justice.

The Additional Government Pleader suggested directing the petitioner to pay 50% of the demanded amount for further opportunities, but the petitioner had already paid taxes on the deemed sales turnover as per their accounts. The court ruled in favor of the petitioner, quashing the impugned orders and remitting the matters back to the respondent for fresh consideration. The respondent was instructed to review the petitioner's objections, documents, conduct necessary inquiries, provide a personal hearing, and redo the assessment in compliance with the law. The court deemed the impugned orders as non-speaking and in violation of natural justice principles, closing the case without costs.

---