INSTALACIONES INABENSA Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenging orders of re-assessment dated 27.07.2015 and 20.08.2015 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Kishanganj Circle, Kishanganj in a proceeding held under Section 33 of the Bihar Value Added Tax Act, 2005, (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") this writ petition has been filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution and challenge is made to the imposition of tax and penalty for two financial years 2011-12 and 2012-13. As far as financial year 2011-12 is concerned, only tax has been assessed, but for the financial year 2012-13, both tax and penalty have been assessed. For the assessment year 2011-12, the tax assessed is Rs.14,59,799/- and for the financial year 2012-13, the tax and penalty is at Rs.1,84,43,060/-.

(2.) As the petitioner has directly challenged the orders of reassessment without exhausting the remedy of appeal available of approaching JCCT (Appeal) Purnea Division, Purnea and taking note of the preliminary objection raised, the question of maintainability of this writ petition has to be taken note of and decided first.

(3.) The petitioner claims to be a Company incorporated under the laws of Spain having its principal place of business at Kishanganj Circle, Kishanganj, Bihar. It is the case of the petitioner that after the assessment orders were passed on 27th of July, 2015 and 20th of August, 2015, coercive steps for recovery under the special provisions, i.e. 47 of the Act has been initiated on 14.02.2017 and therefore, the challenge is made to this action also. Petitioner is engaged in the business of erection of transmission lines on work contract basis and imposition of liability is pertaining to execution of this works contract. However, it is the case of the petitioner that in the matter of reassessment undertaken in this case, proper opportunity of hearing has not been granted to the petitioner. It is stated that after the petitioner received notices for the two financial years, being notice No.2658 and 2657 dated 1st of July, 2015, the petitioner gave their written submission and wanted personal hearing, but this personal hearing has been denied to them and, therefore, the imposition of liability without granting them opportunity of hearing is unsustainable. A prayer was also made to say that even the assessment orders were never served upon them and it is only after coercive steps were initiated 14th of February, 2017 under Section 47 that the petitioner was made aware of the orders passed under the re-assessment proceedings. Accordingly, primarily on the ground that the re-assessment orders have been passed under Section 33 of the Act without granting opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, the extra-ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226 and 227 is being invoked and Sri P.K. Shahi, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner, after referring to Sections 32, 33, Rule 24 and 24A of the Bihar Value Added Tax Rules, 2005, (hereinafter referred to as "the Rules") argued that the Rule mandates grant of opportunity of personal hearing and personal hearing as contemplated under Rule 24 has not been granted, the jurisdiction of the writ court should be invoked and the impugned action quashed as it is in violation of the principles of natural justice.