2022 (11) TMI 685 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Court Upheld Tribunal Decision on TNGST 1997-98 Appeal Emphasizing Decision-Making Process

M/s. Gangai Steel Industries, rep. by tis Proprietor-S. Ramasamy Versus The Secretary, Tamil Nadu sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, The Deputy Commercial tax Officer

M/s. Gangai Steel Industries, rep. by tis Proprietor-S. Ramasamy Versus The Secretary, Tamil Nadu sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, The Deputy Commercial tax ... Issues:Appeal against the Appellate Tribunal's order dated 18.12.2006 in CTSA.No.55/02 regarding an adverse assessment order for TNGST 1997-98. The petitioner contests the Tribunal's reversal of the Additional Appellate Assistant Commissioner's decision dated 30.03.2001. The key issues are suppression of sales and the acceptance of quotations as explanations for discrepancies.Analysis:The petitioner contested the Tribunal's decision to overturn the Additional Appellate Assistant Commissioner's ruling, arguing that the explanations provided for discrepancies were accepted by the Appellate Commissioner. The petitioner maintained that the quotations presented were valid and that the department's conclusion of sale suppression based on those quotations was unwarranted. The petitioner relied on section 39B(2) of the TNGST Act, emphasizing the genuineness of the documents and the reasons for their delayed submission.The Commercial Tax Department defended the Tribunal's decision, asserting that the burden of proof lay with the petitioner and that the evidence presented post the inspection did not justify overturning the original assessment. The department contended that the Tribunal's order was well-considered and should not be interfered with, given the timing of the evidence submission and the lack of justification for the petitioner's attempt to distance themselves from liability.The High Court, after considering the arguments from both sides and reviewing the relevant orders and documents, upheld the Tribunal's decision. The Court emphasized that its role was to assess the decision-making process rather than the decision itself. It noted that the petitioner's attempt to disassociate from liability by producing affidavits long after the assessment notice was issued was not valid under Section 38B. The Court concluded that the Tribunal's order was well-founded and did not warrant intervention, ultimately dismissing the writ petition without costs.