By Dr. K. Shivaram, Ajay R. Singh, Advocates
fiogf49gjkf0d
The petitioner dealer filed writ petitions challenging the assessment orders passed by the Joint Commissioner u/s.42 of the Orissa Value Added Tax Act, 2004 as a result of audit prescribed under Rule 49(1) of the Orissa Value Added Tax Rules, 2005, inter alia, contending that the orders of assessment were passed by the Joint Commissioner who was not competent to assess the petitioner, that they were passed violating the principles of natural justice and that the orders were time-barred as they were passed beyond the time stipulated u/ss. (6) and (7) of section 42 of the Act i.e., one year from January 18, 2010, when the audit visit report was approved and given by the Jt. Commissioner.
The High Court held that it was stated by the Department that the audit was directed by the Jt. Commissioner, Sales Tax of the Range and that he was required to constitute an audit team and monitor the progress of the audits assigned to the team. In view of this, it could not be said that the Jt. Commissioner was not involved in the audit process. In order to maintain transparency, any officer who was involved in any manner or had acted in the process of audit and preparation of the audit report in respect of the dealer should not be the Assessing Officer of that dealer. Otherwise, there would be violation of cardinal principles of natural justice. Therefore the orders passed by the Jt. Commissioner were to be set aside.
