Independent assessment required before tax demands and penalty; order based only on inspection report was set aside.

The Assessing Officer must act as an independent statutory authority and decide dealer objections on their merits; an assessment cannot stand when it is based only on an Enforcement Wing report or an assumed admission recorded at inspection. Because the order showed no independent application of mind, it was found unsustainable and set aside, with remand for fresh adjudication after personal hearing. The penalty proposal under Section 27(3)(c) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 also did not survive, as the foundational ingredients for invoking the penal provision were absent on the recorded facts.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessment order was liable to be set aside for having been passed solely on the basis of the Enforcement Wing report without independent consideration of the dealer's objections, and whether penalty under Section 27(3)(c) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 could be sustained.

Analysis: The Assessing Officer was required to act as an independent statutory authority and examine the objections on merits. An assessment cannot rest merely on the inspection report or on an assumed admission at the time of inspection, because the officer must apply his own mind and arrive at an independent conclusion in accordance with law. Since the impugned order reflected no such independent evaluation, it was held to be illegal and liable to be interfered with. The discussion on penalty proceeded on the basis that the foundational ingredients for invoking the penal provision were absent.

Conclusion: The assessment order was unsustainable and was set aside, and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration with personal hearing and independent adjudication; the penalty proposal also did not survive on the facts recorded.

---