Back
ARVIND KUMAR VERMA
Bharti Associates (Now Known as M/s Shri Mahalakshmi Traders) – Appellant
Versus
Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Tax, Raipur – Respondent
ORDER :
1. Challenge in the present writ petition is to the order dated 15.05.2017 (Annexure P/4) passed by the Respondent No. 1 and order dated 22.01.2018 (Annexure P/8) passed by the Respondent No. 2, for the Assessment Year 2013-14.
2. The issue involved in the present writ petition is as to whether the respondent authorities would have the power to reopen the assessment made without there being an assessment order only accepting the deemed assessment made by the assessee and treating it to be the assessment order.
3. The issue involved is no longer res integra so far as this court is concerned. A series of writ petitions have already been allowed by the Single Bench of this court and which has further been confirmed by the Division Bench as well.
4. The challenge in the present writ petition is to the order under Section 22 of the Chhattisgarh VAT Act (in short, the Act) whereby the respondent authorities have reopened the deemed assessment submitted by the petitioner. It is the further contention of the petitioner that the reopening of an assessment is permissible only in the event of there being an assessment order passed by the respondents as is otherwise required under Section
Reopening of assessments under the Chhattisgarh VAT Act requires a formal assessment order; deemed assessments cannot be treated as such for reassessment purposes.
Section 56 of the VAT Act would reveal that the section has wide power, but seeking of permission by the assessing authority for making reassessment of the dealer is not conferred under the said prov....
Reopening of assessment beyond four years without fresh tangible material or proper disposal of objections is illegal under the Income Tax Act.
A Deputy Commissioner can order reopening of assessments under CST Act Section 9(2A), without invalidating prior assessment orders, ensuring due process is followed.
The assessment order was invalid as it was issued beyond the limitation period prescribed under Section 153 of the Income Tax Act, necessitating adherence to statutory timelines.
Assessments beyond five years are invalid without proper notice, and best judgment assessments require rejection of returns, which was not adhered to in this case.
No time limitation exists under Section 22(4) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act for issuing assessment orders when conditions are met; penalties under Section 22(5) are valid for up to six years.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
