Heard Mr. S.Ravee Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.K.Venkatesh, learned Government Advocate for the respondent.
2. The petitioner is before this Court challenging the order of assessment passed by the respondent under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 for the Assessment year 2003-04. The impugned order is challenged mainly on the ground that the reply submitted by the petitioner was not considered and the Assessing Officer has proceeded solely based upon the observations made by the Enforcement Wing Officials.
3. On a perusal of the impugned order, it appears to be an elaborate and reasoned order. However on a closer scrutiny, it is seen that the entire information in the impugned order is infact the report submitted by the Enforcement Wing Officials. The assessment has been completed by making a brief observation in the last paragraph of the impugned order, in which, it is stated that the petitioner had not filed objections with regard to the notice issued for re-assessment. However, the record of the proceedings shows that the objections dated 24.11.2006 was submitted by the petitioner and he has obtained acknowledgment in the letter delivery book signed by the Superintendent in the office of the respondent on 24.11.2006. This averment has been specifically made in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition in ground "A" of the Grounds. However, the respondent has not filed any counter affidavit nor produced any record to show it is false. Therefore, this Court is convinced that the impugned order is in violation of principles of natural justice.
4. Thus for the above reasons, the matter has to be remitted back to the respondent for fresh consideration. However, I shall add a word of caution to the Assessing Officer that while re-doing the assessment, he shall act in an independent manner and not solely be guided by the observations made by the Enforcement Wing in the D3 proposals. In this regard, it is pertinent to refer to the decision of the Hon'ble Division Bench in the case of Madras Granites (P) Ltd Vs. Commercial Tax Officer, Arisipalayam Circle, Salem and another reported in Vol.146 STC page 642, wherein, it is held that It is well-settled that the assessing officer is a quasi-judicial authority and in exercising his quasi-judicial function of completing the assessment, he is not bound by the instructions or directions of the higher authorities. The above legal principles was followed by this Court in W.P.Nos.31823 to 31830 of 2016 dated 14.09.2016 [Viki Industries Pvt ltd. Vs. The Assistant Commissioner T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J.
sli (CT) and another] and in W.P.Nos.26730 to 26734 and 26916 to 26925 of 2016, dated 08.11.2016 [M/s. Kapil Agencies Vs. The Assistant Commissioner (CT) and others]
6. The above legal principles should be borne in mind while re-doing the assessment. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned order is quashed and the matter is remanded to the respondent for fresh consideration. The petitioner is directed to submit fresh objections within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and on receipt of the same, the respondent shall afford an opportunity of personal hearing and re-do the assessment independently with due application of mind and in accordance with law. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
21.09.2017 sli Index: Yes/No Internet: Yes/No Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order To THE DEPUTY COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, TIRUPUR (NORTH) CIRCLE, TIRUPUR,COIMBATORE DISTRICT.
W.P. No.18642 of 2007