AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Petitioner is a dealer under the provisions of the Karnataka Tax on Entry of Goods Act, 1979 (hereinafter for the sake of brevity referred to as the ''Act''). Petitioner is engaged in the manufacture and export of footwear. Petitioner claims that it is 100% export oriented unit.
In this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution petitioner calls in question the correctness or otherwise of the order of assessment made by the Assessing Authority -second respondent herein, for the assessment year 1993-94 dated 13-12-1999 under the provisions of the Act.
Brief facts are:
The Assessing Authority had issued a pre-assessment notice dated 13-1-1995 relating to the assessment year 1993-94 under the provisions of the Act. Petitioner had replied the pre-assessment notice by filing its detailed reply by its letter dated 23-1-1995. The Assessing Authority considering the objections so filed by the petitioner had passed an order dated 7-2-1995. Aggrieved by the said order, petitioner was before this Court in W.P. No. 8176 of 1996. This Court by its order dated 12-3-1997 was pleased to dispose off the writ petition following the observations made by this Court in W.P. No. 3793 of 1995 connected with W.P. No. 28552 of 1995 disposed off on 12-3-1997. In the aforesaid order this Court had set aside the order of assessment made by the Entry Tax Officer and had remanded the matter to the Assessing Authority to frame a fresh assessment order after affording an opportunity to the petitioner to substantiate their claim for exemption from payment of entry tax under the Act. This Court had also directed the Assessing Authority to complete framing of the assessment order within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Court''s order.
Pursuant to the directions issued by this Court, the Assessing Authority had issued a notice dated 4-11-1998 inter alia directing the petitioner to file its objections, if any, pursuant to the directions issued by this Court in W.P. No. 8176 of 1996. For the reasons best known, petitioner did not choose to file any objections and thereafter the Assessing Authority had issued one more notice dated 2-2-1999 calling upon the petitioner to file his objections if any to the proposal made in the notice dated 4-11-1998. Since petitioner did not file any objections, the Assessing Authority being left with no other alternative proceeded to complete the assessment by his order dated 13-12-1999 and thereafter had issued a demand notice inter alia demanding entry tax in a sum of Rs. 16,80,047.00 for the assessment year 1993-94. Aggrieved by this order, petitioner is before this Court.
Sri S.A. Nazeer, learned Counsel for petitioner-Company submits that the order of assessment made by the Assessing Authority is in violation of the directions issued by this Court in W.P. No. 8176 of 1996 disposed off on 12-3-1997. Further the learned Counsel submits that the order made by the Assessing Authority is in violation of principles of natural justice. Therefore submits that the order made by the Assessing Authority is not only arbitrary but wholly illegal and invalid. Therefore a request is made to set aside the order of assessment and remand the matter to the Assessing Authority to redo the matter in accordance with law.
Sri Vedamurthy, learned Counsel for respondents justifies the impugned order made by the Assessing Authority for the assessment year 1993-94.
This is the second round of litigation by the petitioner before this Court. On an earlier occasion petitioner was before this Court being aggrieved by the order of assessment made by the Assessing Authority for the assessment year 1993-94. This Court by its order dated 12-3-1997 was pleased to dispose off the writ petition and was further pleased to remand the matter to the Assessing Authority to redo the matter in accordance with law. Pursuant to the directions so issued, the Assessing Authority in fact had issued a proposition notice dated 4-11-1998. In my opinion, petitioner should have replied to the proposition notice issued by the Assessing Authority. Petitioner under a bona fide mistake and being of the view that he had already filed appropriate objections to the pre-assessment notice issued by the Assessing Authority by his reply letter dated 23-1-1995, did not file any objections to the proposition notice issued by the Assessing Authority. This in my opinion, is a bona fide mistake. The Assessing Authority could have directed the assessee concerned to file fresh reply to the pre-assessment notice issued dated 4-11-1998. Without even doing so, the Assessing Authority has proceeded to complete the assessment and has confirmed the pre-assessment notice dated 4-11-1998. In fact, in the assessment records the objections filed by the petitioner to the earlier pre-assessment notice was available. The Assessing Authority could have looked into the objections so filed and the documents produced by the assessee concerned. Without doing so, the Assessing Authority has proceeded to frame the impugned assessment order. In my opinion, the said order is in violation of principles of natural justice. Therefore, a writ requires to be issued in the instant case.
In my opinion, the assessee should be put on terms, since he did not care to inform the Assessing Authority that the reply filed by him by his reply letter dated 23-1-1995 would hold good even to the pre-assessment notice dated 4-11-1998. In view of that, petitioner is directed to deposit a sum of Rs. 5,00,000.00 with the respondent-Assessing Authority on or before 9-3-2000.
Since I have come to the conclusion that the orders made by the Assessing Authority is in violation of principles of natural justice, it requires to be set aside by this Court. Accordingly, the following order:
ORDER
Petitioner is directed to deposit a sum of Rs. 5,00,000.00 on or before 9-3-2000 with the Assessing Authority.
The order made by the Assessing Authority for the assessment year 1993-94 under the provisions of the Karnataka Tax on Entry of Goods Act, 1979, is set aside. The matter is remanded back to the Assessing Authority to reframe the order after considering the objections filed by the petitioner dated 23-1-1995 which is available in his records. This exercise the respondent-authority shall do within 15 days from today.
With these observations and directions, petition is disposed off. Ordered accordingly.