Tax Assessment Challenge: Petitioner Wins Partial Relief with Opportunity to Submit New Evidence and Partial Payment HC partially allowed the writ petition challenging a tax assessment order. The court set aside the original order and directed the tax authority to ...
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Tax Assessment Challenge: Petitioner Wins Partial Relief with Opportunity to Submit New Evidence and Partial Payment
HC partially allowed the writ petition challenging a tax assessment order. The court set aside the original order and directed the tax authority to reconsider the case after the petitioner submits additional documentary evidence and pays Rs. 1,00,000/- towards the disputed tax demand. The authority must provide a personal hearing and issue a fresh order within three months.
Issues Involved: Assailed order for not considering petitioner's reply, compliance with principles of natural justice, lack of documentary evidence, setting aside the impugned order, conditions for remand, submission of additional reply with supporting documents, providing a reasonable opportunity, timeline for fresh order.
Analysis:
Issue 1: Assailed Order and Consideration of Petitioner's Reply The petitioner challenged an order dated 29.12.2023, arguing that their reply was not taken into account. The petitioner claimed to have ceased business during the financial year 2017-2018 and filed a nil return in Form GSTR 1. Upon receiving a show cause notice alleging purchases worth Rs. 81,54,282/-, the petitioner responded on 24.10.2023, denying making any purchases during the said financial year. The impugned order was issued based on these circumstances.
Issue 2: Compliance with Principles of Natural Justice The petitioner's counsel contended that the assessing officer should have conducted an inquiry at the alleged suppliers' end to verify the purchases, stating that the petitioner should not be required to prove a negative. Additionally, the petitioner agreed to pay Rs. 1,00,000/- towards the disputed tax demand as a condition for remand.
Issue 3: Lack of Documentary Evidence The government pleader argued that natural justice principles were adhered to through the issuance of intimation and show cause notices, along with considering the petitioner's reply. However, it was noted that the petitioner's reply lacked documentary evidence, such as the bank statement, stock register, or any other supporting documents to substantiate the claim of no purchases during the financial year in question.
Issue 4: Setting Aside the Impugned Order Considering the lack of documentary evidence provided by the petitioner, the court set aside the order dated 29.12.2023 on the condition that the petitioner remits Rs. 1,00,000/- towards the disputed tax demand within two weeks. The petitioner was also granted the opportunity to submit an additional reply with supporting documents within the specified period.
Issue 5: Conditions for Remand and Fresh Order Upon receiving the remittance and additional reply, the respondent was directed to provide a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner, including a personal hearing, and issue a fresh order within three months from the receipt of the additional reply.
Conclusion The writ petition was disposed of with the aforementioned conditions, and no costs were awarded. Connected miscellaneous petitions were closed accordingly.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
