2018 (3) TMI 1273 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Court grants Writ of Certiorarified mandamus, orders reassessment for sales tax liability

M/s. Eshwari Petro Products Private Ltd. Versus The Commercial Tax Officer, M/s. Bitu Tech Constructions, M/s. Karan Engineers

The court granted the Writ of Certiorarified mandamus sought by the petitioner to challenge an order for the assessment year 2009-10 and recover sales tax ... Writ of Certiorarified mandamus to call for the records relating to the impugned order dated 10.11.2017 for the assessment year 2009-10 passed by the 1st respondent - Held that: - the issue involved in the Writ Petition is mismatch and such issue is already covered by the decision of this Court in the case of M/s. JKM Graphics Solutions Private Limited Versus The Commercial Tax Officer [2017 (3) TMI 536 - MADRAS HIGH COURT]. This Court, in the said decision, has directed the Assessing Officer to evaluate a centralised mechanism exclusively to deal with the cases of mismatch and to do some exercise, before issuing a notice. The Assessing Officer has to re-do the assessment - the matter is remitted back to the Assessing Officer to re-do the assessment commencing from the stage of issuing notice of proposal. Issues involved:1. Writ of Certiorarified mandamus to quash an order for the assessment year 2009-10 and direct recovery of sales tax liability.2. Evaluation of a centralised mechanism for cases of mismatch in assessing tax liability.3. Re-doing the assessment following guidelines issued by the court.Detailed Analysis:Issue 1: The petitioner sought a Writ of Certiorarified mandamus to challenge an order dated 10.11.2017 for the assessment year 2009-10 and to recover sales tax liability from certain respondents. The court considered the petitioner's plea and directed the Assessing Officer to re-do the assessment in accordance with the guidelines issued in a previous decision related to similar issues. The court set aside the impugned order and remitted the matter back to the Assessing Officer for reassessment, starting from the notice stage and ensuring a personal hearing for the petitioner before finalizing the assessment order.Issue 2: The learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the issue of mismatch in tax assessment had been addressed in a previous decision of the court, where the court had directed the establishment of a centralised mechanism to handle such cases efficiently. The court emphasized the need for a central mechanism to prevent a one-way approach in assessing tax liabilities, which could lead to multiple pending cases and jeopardize revenue interests. The court instructed the Principal Secretary and Commissioner of Commercial Taxes to devise a detailed procedure for addressing cases of mismatch and to empower Assessing Officers to seek information from other circles. The court highlighted the importance of a fair and reasonable procedure that allows dealers to present their case and prove their entitlement to concessions or set-offs.Issue 3: Following the arguments presented by both parties and considering the necessity to re-do the assessment in line with the court's previous decision, the court allowed the Writ Petition and annulled the impugned order. The matter was referred back to the Assessing Officer for reassessment, with specific instructions to follow the guidelines and procedures outlined by the court. The Assessing Officer was directed to conduct the reassessment promptly and provide a personal hearing to the petitioner before finalizing the assessment order. The court concluded the judgment without imposing any costs, thereby closing the connected miscellaneous petition.