Court directs respondent to provide details for allegations, emphasizes fair assessment, upholding due process

The Court partly allowed the writ petitions, directing the respondent to provide details for mismatch and sales suppression allegations, allowing time for objections and personal hearing. Regarding mis-declaration of value, the respondent can act post DRI's adjudication, ensuring no limitation bar due to petitioner's request for proceedings deferment. The judgment emphasized natural justice, requiring respondents to provide necessary details for fair assessment and highlighted the need for independent enquiry before demanding tax based on external notices, ensuring due process and rights of the petitioner. The Court's directions aimed to uphold fairness and procedural correctness in tax assessments, balancing the interests of both parties.

---

---

Issues:
Assessment orders under Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 for the years 2008-2009 to 2013-2014, involving three common issues: (i) mismatch in purchase details, (ii) alleged interstate sales suppression, and (iii) mis-declaration of value based on information from Directorate of Revenue Intelligence.

Analysis:
1. Mismatch in Purchase Details:
The petitioner requested details of dealers not reporting turnover, asserting innocence due to sellers filing returns. Respondent failed to provide details, violating natural justice. Court directed furnishing of details, granting 15 days for objections and personal hearing.

2. Alleged Interstate Sales Suppression:
Petitioner sought copy of check post extract to respond to sales suppression allegation. Respondent proceeded without furnishing details, violating natural justice. Court ordered furnishing of details, granting opportunity for objections and personal hearing.

3. Mis-declaration of Value:
Allegations based on DRI's show cause notice lacked independent enquiry by Commercial Taxes Department. Duty liability not finalized, making alleged sales suppression uncertain. Court held respondent must await DRI's adjudication before demanding sales tax, ensuring petitioner's right to personal hearing.

4. Conclusion and Directions:
Court partly allowed writ petitions, directing respondent to provide all details for mismatch and sales suppression allegations, granting time for objections and personal hearing. Regarding mis-declaration of value, respondent can act post DRI's adjudication, ensuring no limitation bar due to petitioner's request for proceedings deferment.

In summary, the judgment highlighted the importance of natural justice, requiring respondents to provide necessary details for fair assessment. It emphasized the need for independent enquiry before demanding tax based on external notices, ensuring due process and rights of the petitioner. The Court's directions aimed to uphold fairness and procedural correctness in tax assessments, balancing the interests of both parties.

---