9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (8) TMI 538X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and Mr.Manoharan Sundaram, learned Additional Government Pleader (Taxes) for the respondent. 2. This writ petition is directed against the order of the respondent dated 13.02.2015. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondent before passing the impugned order, has not adhered to the mandatory conditions mentioned under Section 22(4) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax, 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n receipt of the notice dated 28.01.2015, the petitioner also submitted their reply on 04.02.2015, bringing to the notice of the respondent that they have filed the monthly returns in Form -I for December 2012, January 2012, February 2013 and March 2013 and claimed ITC through 'e' filing. Therefore, according to him, the respondent, having received their reply dated 04.02.2015, could have ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... his claim by producing all the relevant documents and as they did not do so, the respondent had to pass the impugned order and therefore, no interference is called for. 7. This Court finds no justification whatsoever to accept the impugned order, since the contention made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there has been violation of mandatory conditions mentioned under Section 22(4) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
