M/S Vishal Udyog vs The State Of Assam And 3 Ors
2021 Latest Caselaw 2422 Gua

                                                                  Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010158642021




                      THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
  (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                          Case No. : WP(C)/5223/2021

         M/S VISHAL UDYOG
         A PROPRIETORSHIP CONCERN HAVING ITS PLACE OF BUSINESS AT
         SOLAPARA ROAD, PALTAN BAZAR, MANIPURI BASTI, KAMRUP (M)
         ASSAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR SHRI MANOJ SAH, AGED
         ABOUT 49 YEARS, S/O LATE DAROGA SAH, RESIDENT OF MANIPURI
         BASTI , DERI SINGH LANE, HOUSE NO. 30, GUWAHATI 781007, KAMRUP
         (M) ASSAM



         VERSUS

         THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS
         REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT.
         OF ASSAM, FINANCE (TAXATION) DEPARTMENT,DISPUR GUWAHATI
         781006

         2:THE COMMISSIONER OF TAXES
          KAR BHAWAN
          BISHNU PRASAD RAVA FLYOVER
          DISPUR
          GANESHGURI
          GUWAHATI 781006
         ASSAM

         3:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF TAXES
          ZONE C
          KAR BHAWAN
          G.S ROAD
          DISPUR
          GUWAHATI 781006
         ASSAM

         4:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF TAXES
                                                                       Page No.# 2/3

             UNIT C
             GUWAHATI
             KAR BHAWAN
             G.S ROAD
             DISPUR
             GUWAHATI 781006
             ASSA

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. D SARAF

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, TAXES




                                  BEFORE
             HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ACHINTYA MALLA BUJOR BARUA

                                       O R D E R

05.10.2021

Heard Mr. D Saraf, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. B Choudhury, learned counsel for the respondents in the Finance and Taxation Department.

2. Issue notice returnable in six weeks.

3. Extra copies of the writ petition be furnished to the learned counsel within three days.

4. The petitioner assails an order dated 21.12.2017, which is an order of best judgment assessment under Section 37 of the Assam Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (in short AVAT Act, 2003). There is a requirement u/s 37(1) of the AVAT Act, 2003 for issuing of a notice to the dealer in the prescribed form and in the prescribed manner so as to give him a reasonable opportunity of being heard before the dealer is assessed to the best of the judgment of the prescribed authority.

5. A ground is taken by the petitioner assessee that before passing of the impugned best judgment assessment order, no notice as required u/s 37(1) of Page No.# 3/3

the AVAT Act, 2003 was issued to the petitioner nor any opportunity was given to him. The petitioner has taken a further ground that the impugned order was passed after the period of limitation.

6. In view of the above, the respondents to produce the records on the next date fixed, which may indicate as to whether the Section 37(1) notice under the AVAT Act, 2003 was issued and served on the petitioner and whether any opportunity of being heard was given to him,

7. Till the next returnable date, no coercive action be taken against the petitioner pursuant to the impugned judgment assessment order dated 21.12.2017. Further continuance of the interim order shall be considered after perusal of the records, as indicated above.

List the matter after six weeks.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant