2024 (3) TMI 64

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rs. It is submitted that the procedure adopted was clearly contrary to the mandatory provision to the Section 65(4) of Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as TNVAT Act, 2006) and Circular No.Q3/3259/2010, dated 14.06.2010. 3. That apart, it is submitted that the accounts of the petitioner were frozen without prior notice to the petitioner on 12.06.2019 and on 14.06.2019 even before the impugned Assessment Orders dated 23.12.2019 were passed. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the decision of this Court rendered in Joint Commissioner (CT), Chennai & Others Vs Original Vel Sporting News made in W.A.No.1757 of 2019, dated 04.06.2019. That apart, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the determination of the tax liability of the petitioner under Section 27 of TNVAT Act, 2006 was beyond the period of limitation for the respective assessment years. In this connection, the learned counsel had brought the attention to the details of time barred assessment as below:- Sl. No Year Period of years permitted for revision Date of Deemed assessment if the condition fulfilled Date of expiry of the period for makin....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ecorded from the petitioner on 29.04.2014. The Statement recorded from the petitioner indicates that petitioner had carried on business from different Assessment Circles with different names at different point of time. 9. The petitioner has also admitted having maintained separate accounts with seven different banks which have been attached. The petitioner had undertaken to furnish the details of the petitioner's invoices and returns and produce the same as and when called for as the accountant of the petitioner was out of station. In the statement, the petitioner has also admitted to that she has rendered work M/s. Universal Telecommunications India Private Limited for the branch office in Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and Madhya Pradesh and payments were received against the invoices raised by the petitioner and they had deducted tax. 10. The petitioner has however not furnished any of the details called. All that the petitioner could furnish was the audited balance sheet for the assessment years 2011-12 and 2012-13 and copies of the work orders available and Form T and few Bank Statements. 11. The case of the petitioners that the impugned notices and the impugned orders passed ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... They deal with the procedure to be followed by the Assessing Officer. Section 22(4) TNVAT Act, 2006 specifically deals with a situation where if no return is submitted by the dealer for any period of the year or if the return filed is incomplete or incorrect, or if not accompanied with any of the documents prescribed or proof of payment of tax, the assessing authority shall, after making such enquiry as it may consider necessary, assess the dealer to the best of its judgment, subject to such conditions as may be prescribed, after the completion of that year. 17. Section 25(1) of the TNVAT Act, 2006 also deals with a similar situation. In both cases the Assessing Officer has to pass an order of assessment in Section 22(4) of the TNVAT Act, 2006. The Assessing Officer has to pass an order of assessment after the completion of the assessment. 18. In 25(1) of the TNVAT Act, 2006 under the somewhat similar circumstances, the Assessing Officer has to determine the tax payable by an assessee provisionally. 19. Both Section 22(4) of the TNVAT Act, 2006 and Section 25 of the TNVAT Act, 2006 are reproduced below:- Section 22 (4) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 Sec....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... and assess a dealer to the best of this judgement, subject to such conditions as may be prescribed, after the completion of the year. 21. There are no records to substantiate that the petitioner had filed returns in time for the respective assessment years in various assessment circles as is contemplated in Rule 7 of the TNVAT Rules, 2007. No Assessment Order was passed by the Assessing Officer for the years in question. Therefore, question of either inferring deemed assessment as is contemplated under section 22 (1) and (2) of the TNVAT Act, 2006 or actual assessment would not arise for the purpose of computation of limitation under Section 27 of the TNVAT Act, 2006. 22. Since no Assessment Order came to be passed, question of the petitioner getting an opportunity to file a fresh return as is contemplated under section 22 (6) (a),, (b) or (c) of the TNVAT Act, 2006 also did not arise. 23. Section 25 of the TNVAT Act, 2006, specifically deals with the proceedings where an Assessee liable to pay tax fails to submit a return within the prescribed period or return submitted by an Assessee appears to be incomplete or incorrect, the Assessing Officer may after making such enqu....