Assessment must consider transaction documents, limitation and notice before reassessment can be sustained.

The HC held that an assessment could not stand where the authority failed to consider the memorandum of understanding, the sworn statement and the nature of the transaction, and did not give a speaking finding on whether it was a slump sale or a sale of plant and machinery. The collection of cheques by the Enforcement Wing was treated as without jurisdiction and could not support the assessment. The Court also required fresh examination of the limitation objection under section 16 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, and of the effect of cancellation of registration, which could not be relied on without due notice. The assessment was set aside and remitted for fresh adjudication.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the assessment order could be sustained without considering the memorandum of understanding, the sworn statement recorded during inspection, and the nature of the transaction. (ii) Whether the reopening was barred by limitation and whether the effect of cancellation of registration could be acted upon without due notice.

Issue (i): Whether the assessment order could be sustained without considering the memorandum of understanding, the sworn statement recorded during inspection, and the nature of the transaction.

Analysis: The memorandum of understanding indicated a transfer of the business, but the order did not record any finding on whether the transaction amounted to a slump sale or a sale of plant and machinery. The sworn statement explaining the nature of the transaction was also not dealt with. The assessment, therefore, lacked consideration of material facts and was not a speaking order. The collection of cheques by the Enforcement Wing was also treated as without jurisdiction and could not strengthen the assessment.

Conclusion: The assessment on this ground could not be sustained and required fresh consideration.

Issue (ii): Whether the reopening was barred by limitation and whether the effect of cancellation of registration could be acted upon without due notice.

Analysis: The challenge raised limitation under section 16 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 for reopening the assessment. The order also failed to deal specifically with the cancellation of the registration certificate, even though that circumstance affected the business and the proposed reassessment. If the cancellation was to be relied upon, a proper notice was required before taking a decision on that basis.

Conclusion: The limitation plea and the effect of cancellation of registration had to be examined afresh in accordance with law.

Final Conclusion: The impugned assessment was set aside and the matter was remitted for fresh adjudication after hearing the petitioner and considering the relevant material and legal objections.

Ratio Decidendi: An assessment or reassessment cannot be sustained unless the authority considers the material transaction documents, gives a speaking finding on the nature of the transaction, and applies the statutory limitation and notice requirements before proceeding.

---