2023 (9) TMI 635 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Court sets aside reassessment order after 6-year delay, deeming proceedings unsustainable. Petitioner wins challenge on delayed initiation.

M/s. Gingee Agriculture Producers, Co-operative Marketing Society Ltd. (E. 1564), Rep. By its General Manager – S. Ravi Versus The State Tax Officer, Gingee

M/s. Gingee Agriculture Producers, Co-operative Marketing Society Ltd. (E. 1564), Rep. By its General Manager – S. Ravi Versus The State Tax Officer, ... Issues Involved:1. Delay in reassessment beyond the prescribed limitation period.2. Validity of reassessment notice issued under a misquoted statutory provision.3. Determination of 'reasonable period' for completing reassessment in absence of statutory limitation.Summary of Judgment:1. Delay in reassessment beyond the prescribed limitation period:The petitioner challenged the reassessment order for the year 2010-11, arguing it was completed almost 10 years after the deemed order of assessment, thus vitiated by unreasonable delay. The initial deemed assessment was made on 29.04.2011. A notice was issued on 23.07.2014 under Section 84 of the TNVAT Act, which was followed by another notice on 23.06.2020 invoking Section 27(1)(a). The petitioner contended that the reassessment should be initiated within 6 years from the date of the deemed assessment, making the 2020 notice barred by limitation.2. Validity of reassessment notice issued under a misquoted statutory provision:The respondent argued that the 2014 notice, although referencing Section 84, was intended for reassessment under Section 27. They asserted that misquoting the provision did not affect the validity of the proceedings, and once reassessment was initiated, there was no limitation for completing it.3. Determination of 'reasonable period' for completing reassessment in absence of statutory limitation:The court acknowledged that while there is no statutory limitation for completing reassessment, actions must be taken within a 'reasonable time.' Citing precedents, the court emphasized that unreasonable delay, even after initiating reassessment within the prescribed period, would vitiate the proceedings. The court noted that the delay of over 6 years between the 2014 and 2020 notices was arbitrary and unreasonable.Conclusion:The court held that the reassessment proceedings were unsustainable due to the unreasonable delay and lack of explanation for the prolonged period between notices. Consequently, the impugned reassessment order was set aside, and the writ petition was allowed.