ORDER :

SONIA GOKANI, J.

1. Being aggrieved by the decision of The Gujarat Value Added Tax Tribunal in Second Appeal No. 151 of 2021 under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 delivered on 22.3.2022, this Tax Appeal has been preferred under Section 78 of the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003.

2. The appellant is an HUF having the place of business at Gandhinagar. He was engaged in the business of trading electronic items such as mobiles phones, computers, etc.

3. The search proceedings were conducted at the premises of the appellant on 30th October, 2014 which continued till 3.11.2014. No unaccounted stock or sale/purchase was found, according to the appellant. However an issue was raised with respect of classification of sales made through websites as local sales even though the ultimate customer was located outside the State of Gujarat. For inter- State sales, input tax credit was required to be partially reduced because of the notification issued under Section 11(6) of the Vat Act. Therefore, provisional assessment order was passed under Section 9(2) of the CST Act read with Section 33 of the Vat Act for the year 2014-15 raising demand against the Appellant by estimating turnover on the strength of previous year’s books of account.

4. The challenge was made to the said provisional assessment order, the First Appeal preferred by the appellant was summarily dismissed. In the Second appeal, the Tribunal demanded combined pre-deposit of Rs.25,00,000/- for the years 2013-14 and 2014-15. Upon payment of such pre-deposit, the matters were remanded to the First Appellate Authority.

5. In the meantime, the case of the appellant was taken up for scrutiny assessment under Section 9(2) of CST Act read with Section 34(2) of the Vat Act. The nominal demand was raised under the CST Act which was duly paid by the appellant at the end of audit assessment.

6. The grievance on the part of the petitioner is that despite the finalization of the audit assessment after considering the provisional assessment order and the books of accounts once again the reassessment under Section 9(2) of the CST Act read with Section 35 of the Vat Act had been initiated in case of appellant. The notice has not been received by the appellant. The reassessment order was passed on the basis of estimated figures of provisional assessment. According to the petitioner by ignoring actual turn over is determined the audit account.

7. The First Appeal was preferred challenging the reassessment order. However, the same was summarily dismissed on the ground of non-payment of pre-deposit.

8. The Second Appeal was preferred challenging the first Appellant Order wherein, the Tribunal also had directed the pre-deposit as same amount on 22.3.2022 and hence, the same was challenged . Relying on the decision of this Court in case of Kavya Marketing Vs. State of Gujarat passed in Special Civil Application No. 1027 of 2022 decided on 10th February, 2022 .

9. This Court while issuing notice for final disposal on 16.12.2022, passed the following order:-

1. Prayers sought for in the present appeal are as follows:

“A. The questions of law framed in para 19 herein above may please be answered in favour of the Appellant-assessee and against the Respondent-department;

B. The impugned order of Tribunal annexed at Annexure A as well as the order of the first appellate authority may please be quashed and set aside and the matter may please be remanded to the first appellate authority for hearing on merits without insisting for any pre-deposit or security and stay against recovery may be granted to the Appellant;

C. Such further relief(s) as deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be granted in the interest of justice for which act of kindness your appellant shall forever pray.”

2. We have heard learned advocate Mr. Uchit N. Sheth for the appellant. He has drawn our attention to the fact that it was during the COVID-19 period and hence the period for competing the assessment was getting o