TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (5) TMI 1397
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....015 and 20.08.2015 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Kishanganj Circle, Kishanganj in a proceeding held under Section 33 of the Bihar Value Added Tax Act, 2005, (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") this writ petition has been filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution and challenge is made to the imposition of tax and penalty for two financial years 2011-12 and 2012-13. As far as financial year 2011-12 is concerned, only tax has been assessed, but for the financial year 2012-13, both tax and penalty have been assessed. For the assessment year 2011-12, the tax assessed is Rs. 14,59,799/- and for the financial year 2012-13, the tax and penalty is at Rs. 1,84,43,060/-. 2. As the petitioner has directly challen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssessment orders were never served upon them and it is only after coercive steps were initiated 14th of February, 2017 under Section 47 that the petitioner was made aware of the orders passed under the re-assessment proceedings. Accordingly, primarily on the ground that the re-assessment orders have been passed under Section 33 of the Act without granting opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, the extra-ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226 and 227 is being invoked and Sri P.K. Shahi, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner, after referring to Sections 32, 33, Rule 24 and 24A of the Bihar Value Added Tax Rules, 2005, (hereinafter referred to as "the Rules") argued that the Rule mandates grant of opportunity o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sailing the impugned action that proper opportunity of hearing, particularly hearing contemplated under Rule 24, has not been granted. Rule 24 of the Rules is as under:- "24. Hearing under section 32 and 33.- (1) The notice of hearing in the matter of proceedings under 32 and 33 shall be in Form N-VI and from N-VII respectively. (2) On the date fixed for hearing the person proceeded against shall be allowed to rebut the accusations leveled against him, but shall not ordinarily be allowed an adjournment. If an adjournment becomes necessary, the authority specified in rule 62 shall record reasons therefore. (3) After giving a hearing, the authority referred to in sub-rule (2) shall record an order containing precisely and clearly the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....32 and 33. Thereafter, vide Annexure-C series, written objections were filed with reference to Notice No.2658 and separately with reference to Notice No.2657 dated 01.07.2015. Detailed objections have been raised not only for imposition of tax, but also for a penalty with regard to assessment financial year 2012-13. Thereafter, detailed orders have been passed by the authorities concerned. The orders have been passed on 27.07.2015 itself and records indicate that notices for demand were issued to the petitioner, thereafter on 28.07.2015 and 01.09.2015. These were also served by e mail on the petitioners address and notices of proof of their service are also available. 7. Apart from the aforesaid document, the order-sheet of the proceedings....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r documents in their official capacity, were also laid off. Amid this process of internal administrative restructuring, lot of documents handled by these employees could not be handed over to the succeeding employees. In certain cases, the petitioner verily believes that important documents like notices from the VAT Department were pushed under the carpet with malicious intentions." 8. From the aforesaid, it is clear that it is not a case where per se on the basis of the material available on record, a categorical finding can be recorded that the petitioner was not granted any opportunity of hearing and ex parte order was passed behind their back. On the contrary, the documents do indicate prima facie that opportunity of hearing was exten....