IMPORTANT POINT
Reopening of assessments under the Chhattisgarh VAT Act requires a formal assessment order; deemed assessments cannot be treated as such for reassessment purposes.

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 21(1) of the Act, which in the instant case has not been passed and the respondent authorities have proceeded to reopen the account based upon the deemed assessment in case of the petitioner.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner referred to two of the recent decisions of the Division Bench of this Court on the same subject matter i.e. one which was decided in WA No. 687/2018 (State of Chhattisgarh and Others v. M/s. Tata Teleservices Limited) and other connected appeals decided on 18.08.2022. These appeal by the State were against the order passed by the Single Bench in WPT No. 79/2017 (M/s. Tata Teleservices Limited v. State of Chhattisgarh and Others) decided on 20.03.2018. In the writ petition the Writ Court in an identical set of facts had held the order of reassessment to be bad when the order of assessment itself was not issued by the respondents. This was subjected to challenge before the Division Bench and the Division Bench affirming the same rejected the three appeals filed by the State. The Division Bench in its order has in paragraphs No. 23 to 26, 28 & 29 has held as under:

“23. Section 22(1) of the VAT Act, amongst others, provides that where the assessment or re-assessment of a dealer has been made under the VAT Act and for any reason any sale or purchase of goods liable to be taxed under the VAT Act or the Act repealed by this Act during any period, (a) has been under assessed or has escaped assessment, or (b) has been assessed at a lower rate or (c) any wrong deduction has been made while making the assessment, or (d) a rebate of input tax has incorrectly been allowed while making the assessment, or (e) is rendered erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue consequent to or in the light of any judgment or order of any Court or tribunal which has become final, the Commissioner may at any time within a period of five calendar years from the date of order of assessment or from the date of judgment or order of any court or tribunal proceed in such manner as may be prescribed, to assess or re-assess, as the case may be the tax payable by such dealer after making such enquiry as he considers necessary, and assess or reassess to tax.

24. As the word “order” appearing in Section 22(1) of the VAT Act is not defined in the VAT Act, the learned Single Judge took the aid of definition of “order” in Section 2(14) of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 as also dictionary meaning of the word “order” in Black’s Law Dictionary (Eighth Edition) to come to the conclusion that the words “order of assessment” employed in Section 22(1) of the VAT Act clearly denotes that there must be a formal adjudication by the assessing officer after taking into account the return and statutory compliances and the documents furnished by the petitioner in contradisti