Court directs petitioner to pursue statutory appeal after dismissing writ petitions.

The court dismissed the writ petitions, directing the petitioner to pursue the statutory appeal. The petitioner was allowed to seek condonation of any delay in filing the appeal and to apply for exclusion of time spent in the writ petition under Section 14 of the Limitation Act. The court preserved the petitioner's rights to raise all questions available, including those raised in the writ petitions. No costs were imposed, and connected miscellaneous petitions were closed.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Nature of sales (Intra-State vs. Inter-State).
2. Use of income tax records in TNVAT assessments.
3. Independent application of mind by the Assessing Officer.
4. Alternate remedy through statutory appeal.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Nature of Sales (Intra-State vs. Inter-State):
The petitioner contended that only Intra-State sales were effected in the relevant assessment years (2011-12 and 2015-16), whereas the impugned assessment orders concluded that there were inter-state sales. The State Counsel argued that the assessments were based on available material and any factual disputes could not be adjudicated in a writ petition.

2. Use of Income Tax Records in TNVAT Assessments:
The petitioner argued that the use of income tax records for best judgment assessment under the TNVAT Act was impermissible. The petitioner relied on the judgment in "Sharoff Syndicate vs. The Assistant Commissioner (CT)" where it was noted that the courses of taxation under the Income Tax Act and the Sales Tax Act are different. However, the court observed that income tax records are not completely forbidden, citing the "Sharoff Syndicate" judgment which allows for their use under certain circumstances.

3. Independent Application of Mind by the Assessing Officer:
The petitioner claimed that the Assessing Officer did not apply his mind independently of the proposal by the Enforcement Wing Officials, violating the principle laid down in "Narasus Roller Flour Mills Vs. Commercial Tax Officer (Enforcement Wing)". The court, after reviewing the impugned orders, concluded that the Assessing Officer had indeed considered the proposals, the objections raised by the petitioner, conducted a personal hearing, and provided independent findings. The court also referenced judgments from the Supreme Court, emphasizing that best judgment assessments involve some approximation and guesswork but should not be arbitrary or capricious.

4. Alternate Remedy through Statutory Appeal:
The petitioner argued that since the Enforcement Wing's proposals were approved by a Joint Commissioner, a Deputy Commissioner could not act as an Appellate Authority. The court rejected this argument, stating that even if the Enforcement Wing's proposals were approved by a higher authority, the Assessing Officer must independently apply his mind. The court held that the argument that a Deputy Commissioner cannot act as an Appellate Authority was untenable. The court emphasized the principle of alternate remedy, especially in matters involving taxes, as reiterated by the Supreme Court in "Satyawati Tondon" and "K.C. Mathew" cases. The court decided to relegate the petitioner to the alternate remedy of an appeal to the jurisdictional Deputy Commissioner.

Conclusion:
The court dismissed the writ petitions, directing the petitioner to pursue the statutory appeal. The petitioner was allowed to seek condonation of any delay in filing the appeal and to apply for exclusion of time spent in the writ petition under Section 14 of the Limitation Act. The court preserved the petitioner's rights to raise all questions available, including those raised in the writ petitions. No costs were imposed, and connected miscellaneous petitions were closed.

---