9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (10) TMI 538X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uthorities concerned Penalty u/s 22(2) Held that:- Assessee charged sales tax at 12% as against 4% on sales to the Government department. Thus, the Tribunal held that the levy of penalty was in accordance with the provisions of law - Decided against assessee. - Tax Case (Revision) No.30 of 2009 - - - Dated:- 23-8-2013 - Chitra Venkataraman And K. B. K. Vasuki,JJ. For the Petitioner : Mr. N. Inbarajan For the Respondent : Mr. A. R. Jayapratap, G. A (Taxes) ORDER (Order of the Court was made by Chitra Venkataraman, J. ) The above Tax Case Revision is filed at the instance of the assessee as against the order of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal for the assessment year 1994-95. The above Tax Case Revision was admitted on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e turnover in the monthly returns filed by them for the assessment year 1994-95. Thus, the Assessing Officer allowed the exemption claimed at 30% towards labour charges and determined total and taxable turnover and levied tax. In the assessment order, the Assessing Officer also found that the dealer collected 12% sales tax as against 4% on the sales to the Government department. As such, the Assessing Officer proposed to levy penalty under Section 22(2) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act. After hearing the assessee's objection, the Assessing Officer confirmed the assessment. 3. Aggrieved by this, the assessee went on appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, who found that the assessee had charged separa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he assessment. As regards penalty under Section 22(2) of the Act, the Tribunal also confirmed the same. Hence, the assessee filed the present Tax Case Revision before this Court. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the assessee/petitioner herein submitted that the assessee had purchased the entire materials involved in the execution of works contract from outside the State. As such, the assessee's claim for exemption under Section 3(B)(2-a) cannot be rejected. We do not accept the submission made by the learned counsel for the assessee, in the absence of any material to substantiate the same. The assessee has no where stated in the appeal grounds or in reply that the work contract was executed from outside the State of Tamil Nadu and they pu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
