9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (9) TMI 695X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt year 2004-05 in the prescribed format with regard to its total and taxable turn over under the Act as well as under the Central Sales Tax Act. The Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Bangalore, accepted the returns and passed an order on 17.7.2006. He also issued a demand notice on the said date raising additional demand. The petitioner by his application dated 25.9.2006 sought rectification of the above assessment order and demand notice dated 17.7.2006 under Section 25A of the Act. The Assessing Authority did not pass any order on the application for rectification within a period of four months from the date of receipt of the said application. The petitioner contends that he was under a bona fide impression that the assessment ord ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s notice on 2.9.2013 by filing interim objections assailing the proposed suo motu proceedings by placing reliance on the order passed by this Court in W.P.NO.20026/2007. The petitioner also sought time to file final objections as well as personal hearing. On 9.1.2014 a final notice was issued under Section 21(2) of the Act requesting the petitioner to appear. This was responded to by the petitioner on 18.1.2014 seeking four weeks time to appear and for a personal hearing. Then the matter was posted to 7.3.2014. Then a letter was issued on behalf of the petitioner asking for personal hearing in the first week of April 2014. But an endorsement was issued on 12.3.2014 requesting the petitioner to file objections on or before 21.3.2014 and to a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... jections on 7.3.2014 neither the petitioner nor his counsel had appeared before the first respondent/Authority, but the impugned order has been assailed on various grounds including on the ground of limitation. If only the petitioner or his Advocate had appeared on the dates before the first respondent and explained the position of law, possibly the first respondent would have appreciated the case of the petitioner in a better perspective. Be that as it may, the only relief that can be granted to the petitioner at this stage is, he is given an opportunity to appear before the first respondent as he had sought for a personal hearing in the matter. 7. In that view of the matter, the impugned order is quashed. The petitioner or his representa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
