9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (8) TMI 1015X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essary materials forming basis for review to the petitioner. - W.P. (MD) No. 2648 of 2007, M.P. (MD) No. 1 of 2007 - - - Dated:- 8-8-2011 - VINOD K. SHARMA J. P. Radhakrishnan for the petitioner Mrs. S. Bharathi, Government Advocate, for the respondent ORDER The petitioner has approached this court, with a prayer, for issuance of a writ, in the nature of certiorari, to quash the order of assessment, dated February 23, 2007, being in violation of principles of natural justice, and also contrary to second proviso to section 3(2), and section 16 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959. The petitioner is dealer in hides and skins. For the assessment year 2003-04, the petitioner reported a total taxable turnover of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... #39;The objections are carefully examined and they are not found acceptable. Hence, the objections are overruled and the assessment is revised as under.' By pointing out the said order, dated November 15, 2005, the learned counsel for the petitioner states that though the petitioner has specifically contended that the dressed skins are the Second Schedule goods, the proviso clause to section 3(2) of the Act will not apply but only the First Schedule goods can be made liable under the proviso clause to section 3(2) of the Act, which enables the assessing officer to levy tax on the earliest of the successive dealer, the impugned order has been passed mechanically without considering such reply. When a specific plea has been raised by t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d parties' records, it is incumbent on the part of the respondent to furnish the said copies to the petitioner so as to enable him to submit his explanation. Hence, the respondent is also directed to furnish the Xerox copy of the third party records, which have been relied upon by the respondent, to the petitioner in case if he intends to pass orders afresh. 9. Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed setting aside the impugned order of the respondent, dated November 15, 2005 as indicated above. Consequently, W.P.M. P. No. 202 of 2006 is closed. The case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the decision of this court, as the assessment order in the case of petitioner also has been revised, in violation of provision of the A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
