9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (11) TMI 844X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on during October, 2009. A further contention raised by the petitioner that no specific order was issued by the authority concerned cancelling the benefit of the settlement issued under exhibits P5 and P5(a) need to be rejected as it is evident that the petitioner had never acted upon in accordance with the settlement and the settlement so permitted has never come into effect. Therefore the recovery steps now initiated cannot be assailed on the ground that no specific order cancelling the settlement is issued. W.P. dismissed. - W.P. (C) No. 28878 of 2009 - - - Dated:- 5-11-2009 - ABDUL REHIM C.K. , J. C. K. ABDUL REHIM J. Assessments for the years 1998-99 and 1999-2000 with respect to the petitioner, under section 17(3) of the K ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rom the subsequent month onwards. It is complied that the orders issued in exhibits P5 and P5(a) has not stipulated the timelimit within which the remittances need be made, nor it has specifically provided any instalment facility. According to the petitioner he had approached the second respondent on several occasions and explained about the provisions contained in section 23B as well the circular issued by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes formulating the procedure to be followed with respect to the issuance of orders on such settlement was brought to the notice. But it is alleged that the second respondent has not taken any action to correct the orders. It is evident from exhibit P6 that consequent to failure on the part of the p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in taxing statutes there is no room for any intendment and regard must be had to the clear meaning of the words and that the matter should be governed only by the language of the notifications, i.e., by the plain terms of the exemption. In the case at hand it is evident that exhibits P5 and P5(a) orders were issued to the petitioner as early as in December, 2008. The petitioner had submitted application for availing of the benefit of the scheme, in the form prescribed, knowing very well about the provisions contained in section 23B. It is evident from section 23B(4) that the provisions mandate the dealer to remit 25 per cent of the amount within 15 days on receipt of the intimation, and the balance amount in three equal instalments start ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
