TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>High Court Quashes Tax Assessment Orders for Violating Natural Justice Principles</h1> <h3>M/s. Sri Kumaran Trading Company Versus The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer</h3> M/s. Sri Kumaran Trading Company Versus The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer - 2017 (354) E.L.T. 293 (Mad.) , [2017] 105 VST 306 (Mad) Issues:Challenge to assessment orders for the years 2001-02 & 2002-03 under TNGST Act and CST Act. Validity of assessment without affording an opportunity for cross-examination and perusal of documents. Relevance of earlier judgment in W.P.No.14851 of 2005.Analysis:The petitioner, a registered dealer, challenged assessment orders for 2001-02 & 2002-03 under TNGST Act and CST Act. The impugned orders were revisions of assessment under Section 16 of TNGST Act. The respondent disbelieved transactions involving Mr. Mahendra Kumar Jain but did not question all transactions, unlike in a previous case. The petitioner sought copies of statements and cross-examination to establish the genuineness of transactions. The High Court noted that the registration of dealers was canceled after the relevant assessment year. The court allowed the writ petition and issued directions based on previous orders.In response, the respondent argued that the petitioner should avail the alternate remedy of filing an appeal against the assessment orders. However, the High Court can intervene under Article 226 of the Constitution in exceptional circumstances. Referring to the earlier judgment in W.P.No.14851 of 2005, the court reiterated the importance of affording an opportunity for cross-examination and perusal of documents before completing assessments.The court cited a Supreme Court case where reliance on statements from third parties without the opportunity for cross-examination was deemed unfair. The petitioner had submitted objections and requested cross-examination, which were not adequately addressed. The court found a violation of natural justice principles, rendering the impugned order unsustainable. Therefore, the writ petitions were allowed, setting aside the impugned orders and remitting the matter back to the respondent for proper consideration with directions for providing copies of statements and records and allowing cross-examination. No costs were awarded, and the connected Miscellaneous Petitions were closed.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
