9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (7) TMI 898X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er of assessment dated February 28, 1997 and remanded the matter to the first respondent to enable the petitioner to produce the records. Therefore, the reason assigned by the first respondent for passing the impugned order of assess ment is not sustainable. It is therefore held that the assessee did not have due notice as contemplated under rule 52(1) of the Rules. Writ petition is allowed and the impugned order is set aside and the first respondent is directed to issue a notice, fixing the time and date for the petitioner to produce the records. - W.P. No. 7850 of 2008 - - - Dated:- 9-7-2010 - GOPINATHAN P.S. , J. ORDER:- T.S. SIVAGNANAM J. By consent, the main writ petition itself is taken up for disposal. The prayer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 006, ordered that the original order of assessment dated February 28, 1997 stands confirmed and demanded tax and penalty. This order dated March 2, 2006 is impugned in this writ petition. The impugned order is assailed on the ground that it is contrary to the direction issued by the appellate authority and in violation of the principles of natural justice as no notice or opportunity was given to the petitioner prior to passing the order. Further, it is contended that the question of confirmation of the order of assessment dated February 28, 1997 does not arise, since the appellate authority had already set aside the same and the matter was remanded for fresh consideration. Therefore, the impugned order is outcome of non-application of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he impugned order that the original order is confirmed, cannot be countenanced. Rule 52(1) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Rules, 1959 provides for service of notice and clause (a) of the rule states that the notice should be served by giving or tendering it to the dealer or his authorized represent ative and clause (b) contemplates issue of notice to the residential address and clause (c) is to the effect that if the address of the dealer is known to the assessee, the notice should be sent by registered post and such notice should be sent to the residential address and without resorting to such procedure, the respondents cannot resort to the procedure of affixture. Thus, it is seen that there is violation of rule 52(1) of the Rul ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
