Videocon D2H Limited Vs State of U.P. And 3 Ors. (Allahabad High Court)
The petitioner, a direct-to-home (DTH) broadcasting service provider operating under licences issued under the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 and the Indian Wireless & Telegraph Act, 1933, approached the Court challenging a provisional assessment order dated 16 February 2016 passed under the U.P. VAT Act for the period April 2015 to December 2015. The petitioner had a network of distributors and dealers in Uttar Pradesh for installation of set-top boxes. An inquiry had initially been undertaken by the Assessing Officer on 11 January 2016 regarding verification of consignment sales, and the matter was adjourned on 10 February 2016.
Meanwhile, on 8 February 2016, the Assessing Authority directed that a notice be issued for provisional assessment, fixing 10 February 2016 as the first date. The office generated the notice online on 9 February 2016 at 5:37 p.m., and the petitioner states that the notice was served at around 8:30 p.m. the same day, requiring appearance on 10 February 2016. The petitioner appeared on 10 February and sought adjournment to file a reply. The matter was adjourned to 15 February 2016.
After examining the original record, the Court held that the entire proceedings were conducted in undue haste and in gross violation of the principles of natural justice contained in Article 14 of the Constitution and Section 25(1) of the U.P. VAT Act. Section 25(1) requires the Assessing Officer to conduct such inquiry as deemed fit and to provide a “reasonable opportunity of being heard” before determining turnover, tax payable, or admissible input tax credit. The Court emphasised that “reasonable opportunity” includes both the opportunity to file objections and a reasonable opportunity of oral hearing.
