2017 (3) TMI 1273 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Court sets aside assessment order, remits for fresh assessment, directs personal hearing within 8 weeks.

The Court allowed the writ petition, setting aside the assessment order and remitting the matter to the Assessing Authority for a fresh assessment. The ... Validity of assessment order - natural justice - Assessing Officer relied on the Web Report and passed the impugned order without furnishing all the details and conducting thorough enquiry with the dealers - Held that: - this Court, in the batch of cases, has dealt with the matter in respect of the assessments made based on Web Report and found that the centralised mechanism has to be evolved for passing such order of assessment - as regards the contention raised by the petitioner that the assessee was not given personal hearing before imposing penalty u/s 22(4) of TNVAT Act is concerned, a perusal of the order of assessment does not indicate that the petitioner was given any opportunity of personal hearing before passing the same - matter needs to be remitted back to the Assessing Authority for re-doing the exercise after following the procedures/directions stipulated in the order - petition allowed - appeal allowed by way of remand. Issues:Challenge to order of assessment based on reliance on Web Report without thorough enquiry and personal hearing for imposing penalty under Section 22(4) of Tamil Nadu VAT Act.Analysis:The petitioner challenged the order of assessment, arguing that the Assessing Officer relied on the Web Report without conducting a thorough enquiry and without providing all details. The petitioner also contended that the penalty under Section 22(4) of the Tamil Nadu VAT Act was imposed without granting a personal hearing. The Court noted that a previous batch of cases had addressed similar issues and emphasized the need for a centralized mechanism to handle assessments based on Web Reports. The Court highlighted the importance of conducting a thorough enquiry before calling upon the dealer to explain discrepancies. It was emphasized that a centralized mechanism would prevent multiple proceedings and ensure a fair process for dealers.The Court found that the decision from the previous batch of cases was directly applicable to the present case. The petitioner was not given a personal hearing before the penalty was imposed under Section 22(4) of the Tamil Nadu VAT Act, as per the assessment order. Consequently, the Court decided to remit the matter back to the Assessing Authority for a fresh assessment following the procedures outlined in the previous order. The Assessing Authority was directed to provide a hearing to the petitioner and ensure compliance with the specified procedures within eight weeks from the date of the order.In conclusion, the writ petition was allowed, setting aside the impugned order of assessment and remitting the matter back to the Assessing Authority for a fresh assessment. The Assessing Authority was instructed to conduct the exercise following the directions laid out in the previous order and provide a hearing to the petitioner within a specified timeframe. No costs were awarded, and connected miscellaneous petitions were closed.