Court No. - 3 Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 739 of 2021 Petitioner :- Baba Alloys(P) Ltd. Respondent :- Additional Comm. Grade 1 Commercial Tax(Prabhar) And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Suyash Agarwal Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Naheed Ara Moonis,J. Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
Heard Sri Suyash Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Apurva Hajela, learned Standing Counsel for the State.
Challenge has been raised to the reassessment proceeding for the A.Y. 2011-12 (U.P.) under the U.P. Vat Act, 2008.
The submission advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner has been subjected to regular assessment vide assessment order dated 25.2.2015 wherein all facts arising from a survey conducted on 19.5.2021 by the Special Investigation Branch of the Commercial Tax Department had been taken into account. Without disclosing the material on the basis of which the reassessment is being initiated the present notice has been issued on vague and general presumption as to escapement on a similar search conducted by the Central Excise Authorities. Thus, the existence of the material and the formation of the reasons to believe have been assailed.
Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, it appears that the search proceedings were conducted by the Central Excise Authorities in the month of July 2013, however, undisputedly, the Commercial Tax Department received information of the same vide communication dated April 2015. The reasons to believe also appear to make specific allegation of escapement of turnover at the hands of the present petitioner with respect to purchases claimed by from third parties. The party names have also been mentioned together with quantification of the turnover under the Central Excise proceeding has also been referred to in the impugned notice.
Thus at present, it cannot be said that there is no material available with the revenue authorities as may be relevant for the formation of the reasons to believe as to escapement of turnover at the hands of the petitioner. Also, from a plane perusal of the notice dated 22.2.2020, it can be seen that an application of mind has been made to that material and the reason has been formed.
The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the material has not yet been disclosed to the petitioner, cannot be a ground to assail the reassessment proceeding at this preliminary stage. All that is required to be examined is the existence of the material and the relevancy of the same in the context of reasons to believe to initiate the reassessment proceeding.
As noted above, the above conditions prima facie, appear to be satisfied in the present facts of the case. Therefore, leaving all courses open to the petitioner to object to the reassessment proceeding upon due participation in the same, no ground is made out to offer any interference on the jurisdictional issue to initiate the reassessment proceeding.
The writ petition is accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 20.9.2021
M. Tariq Digitally signed by NAHEED ARA MOONIS Date: 2021.09.20 16:45:36 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by SAUMITRA DAYAL SINGH Date: 2021.09.20 16:46:32 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad