Court remands case for fresh consideration, giving petitioner chance to substantiate by paying 15% disputed tax.

The court remanded the matter to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration after granting the petitioner an opportunity to substantiate their case by paying 15% of the disputed tax for each year within three weeks. The petitioner could treat the orders as show cause notices, submit objections with supporting records, and request necessary information from the respondent. Failure to comply would result in the respondent proceeding with recovery actions as per the original assessment orders, with no costs awarded and associated miscellaneous petitions closed.

---

---

Issues Involved:
Petitioner challenging assessment orders under TNVAT Act for multiple years, belated approach for judicial review, minimal turnover and tax amounts, request for opportunity to substantiate case, court's decision to remand matter to Assessing Officer for fresh consideration.

Analysis:

1. Challenge to Assessment Orders:
The petitioner, a registered dealer under the TNVAT Act, contested assessment orders for the years 2011-2015. The petitioner had not utilized the available appellate remedy or approached the court earlier to challenge the assessments. The delay was attributed to reliance on a consultant's advice regarding a pending mismatch issue before the court. The petitioner became aware of the court's decision on the matter only after seeking legal counsel.

2. Minimal Turnover and Tax Demands:
The turnover amounts for the respective assessment years were relatively low, with tax demands below Rs. 1,00,000 except for the year 2013-14. The petitioner contended that they possessed evidence to refute the allegations against them and requested an opportunity to present detailed information to disprove any connection to the disputed transactions.

3. Court's Decision and Directions:
Considering the circumstances, the court granted the petitioner another chance to present their case before the Assessing Officer. Despite the early issuance of assessment orders, the respondent had not initiated tax and penalty recovery. The court directed the petitioner to pay 15% of the disputed tax for each year within three weeks. Compliance would allow the petitioner to treat the orders as show cause notices, enabling them to submit objections with supporting records. The respondent was instructed to provide necessary information upon request. Following the petitioner's response, a personal hearing would be granted, and the assessment would be redone lawfully. No coercive action would be taken during this process.

4. Conclusion:
The court disposed of all writ petitions, imposing the payment condition on the petitioner for further proceedings. Failure to comply would lead to the respondent proceeding with recovery actions as per the original assessment orders. No costs were awarded, and associated miscellaneous petitions were closed as a result of this judgment.

---