M/S.Amirtha Distributors vs. The Assistant Commissioner

Facts

The petitioner, M/s.Amirtha Distributors, challenged assessment orders dated March 26, 2018, for the periods 2014-15 and 2015-16, issued by the Assistant Commissioner (ST) (FAC). The petitioner, a dealer in tyres, had filed returns under the self-assessment scheme. Following an inspection by Enforcement Wing Officers on December 23, 2015, defects were pointed out. The respondent issued a revision notice on November 28, 2017, alleging excess availment of Input Tax Credit (ITC) to the extent of Rs. 10,93,813/- and purchases from RC cancelled dealers, based on web-obtained data. The petitioner requested these documents to file effective objections but received none. The respondent subsequently passed the impugned assessment orders without providing the requested documents or affording a personal hearing, overruling the petitioner's objections summarily.

Held

The Court held that the assessment orders passed by the respondent were unsustainable in law due to violations of the principles of natural justice. The respondent failed to provide the petitioner with the documents relied upon for the revision of assessment, which were obtained through web-based data. The Court noted that the respondent had not considered the specific objections raised by the petitioner and had overruled them summarily without recording any reasons. The judgment cited *Madras Granites (P) Ltd vs. Commercial Tax Officer* to emphasize that a quasi-judicial authority must independently apply its mind and cannot merely rely on reports without providing necessary documents to the assessee. The Court also referred to *Tvl.SRC Projects Private Limited vs. the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes* and other precedents, highlighting the mandatory nature of affording a personal hearing and providing documents to enable the dealer to present their defence. Consequently, the impugned orders were set aside, and the matters were remanded back to the respondent for fresh consideration. The respondent was directed to furnish all relied-upon materials, provide ample opportunity for objections, and grant a personal hearing, ultimately passing a reasoned order.

Key Issues

1. Whether the assessment orders passed by the respondent are in violation of the principles of natural justice, specifically concerning the non-furnishing of relied-upon documents and the denial of a personal hearing, contrary to Section 27 of the TNVAT Act and established legal precedents? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner contended that the respondent failed to provide the documents relied upon for the revision of assessment, which were obtained through web-based cross-verification. They argued that without these documents, they could not effectively file objections. Furthermore, the petitioner asserted that the denial of a personal hearing, despite a specific request, violated the principles of natural justice. They relied on judgments such as *Madras Granites (P) Ltd vs. Commercial Tax Officer*, *Tvl.SRC Projects Private Limited vs. the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes*, *Sri Kumaran Trading Company vs. Deputy Commercial Tax Officer*, and *M/s.APT Leather vs. The Commercial Tax Officer* to emphasize the mandatory nature of providing documents and affording personal hearings. Respondent's arguments: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the respondent.