Andhra Pradesh HC directs to Accept ‘C Form’ Even If Assessment Orders already been Passed by Assessing Officer [Read Order]

In a recent case, the High Court of Andhra Pradesh directed the authority to reopen the assessment filed by the petitioner and deal with the acceptance of the documents more particularly Form C and Form H, declarations

The petitioner is a registered dealer of the respondent under the VAT Act 2005 and CST Act 1956, engaged in the business of processing of raw granite blocks for manufacturing and export sales of polished granite slabs. A final assessment made by the respondent under the Act, It is laid that higher tax has been levied in the absence of any supporting evidence for direct exports and statutory declarations as required under section 5(3) of the CST Act without granting any time to file objections determining the turnover. After receipt of the impugned proceedings, the petitioner submitted direct export documents, Form C, Form H declarations along with proof of exports with a request to revise the assessment proceedings.

The petitioner submitted that the judgments in the previous cases Consolidated Coffee Ltd. V Coffee Board, Banglore And Godrej Agrovet Ltd V Commercial Tax Officer Elur on the subject permit the petitioner to rectify the omissions in the impugned proceedings. He also refer to rules 60 of APVAT Rules read with section 9(2) of the CST Act 1956, to show that “any authority prescribed, appellate or revising authority may at any time within four years from the date of any order passed by him rectify any clerical or arithmetical mistake apparent from the record.” The meaning “clerical” or “arithmetical” mistake came from consideration before the honourable apex court wherein the apex court permitted to reopen the assessment basing on the documents filed subsequently.

The respondent audited books of account for the tax periods declaring excess credit in form VAT305. While the request for revision is pending with the respondent, the proposed notice came to be issued for the realization of the impugned demand stating that action will be initiated under the Revenue Recovery Act and also proposed to take actions under section 29 and 25 of the AP VAT Act 2005.

The division bench comprising of Justice C Praveen Kumar and Justice Cheekati Manavendranath Roy held that it is a fit case where the relief sought for by the petitioner can be granted to the extent of directing the authority to reopen the assessment filed by the petitioner and deal with the acceptance of the documents more particularly Form C and Form H, declarations and then pass order in accordance with law. The writ petition is allowed.