2024 (5) TMI 930

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....than Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (for short the 'Act'), creating a demand of Rs. 27,87,371/-. 2. The brief facts are that the petitioner was registered under the Act. The returns for assessment year of 2014-2015 was filed claiming for Input Tax Credit (for short "ITC"). 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that assessment order is a system generated order passed without application of mind. There is no reasoning given for disallowing the ITC claimed in the returns. It is further argued that provisions of Section 23 deals with the deemed assessment and its applicability is subject to Section 24. As per the order, there was no proceedings initiated under Section 24 of the Act. 4. Per contra the petitioner has a remedy of appea....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ic whirlpool we would rely on some old decisions of the evolutionary era of the constitutional law as they still hold the field." 7. From perusal of the impugned order, it is evident that it is a computer generated computation. Neither the basic facts with regard to the issuance of notice and non-compliance is mentioned in the order nor the reasons for disallowance. 8. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in M/s Kranti Associates Pvt. Ltd. and another v. Sh. Masood Ahmed Khan and others reported in 2010(9) SCC 496 has held that every judicial/quasi-judicial order must be supported by reasons to be recorded in writing. The operative part of the decision of Supreme Court in Kranti Associates (supra) read as under:- "a. In India the judici....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... relevant factors have been objectively considered. This is important for sustaining the litigants' faith in the justice delivery system. j. Insistence on reason is a requirement for both judicial accountability and transparency. k. If a Judge or a quasi-judicial authority is not candid enough about his/her decision-making process then it is impossible to know whether the person deciding is faithful to the doctrine of precedent or to principles of incrementalism. l. Reasons in support of decisions must be cogent, clear and succinct. A pretence of reasons or "rubber-stamp reasons" is not to be equated with a valid decision-making process. m. It cannot be doubted that transparency is the sine qua non of....