9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (1) TMI 280X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Joseph Prabakar learned Additional Government Pleader (Taxes), who took notice for the respondent and with their consent, the main writ petition is taken up for disposal. 2. The petitioner company is a baker involved in the manufacture of both taxable and exempted bakery products and in addition to the manufacture of bakery products, it also involved in tradin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... refore, the petitioner filed a detailed objections in their letter dated 26.09.2015 highlighting the difference in the amount of ITC, the exempted and total turnover adopted in the formula for the computation of reversal of ITC. Despite this, the respondent in its impugned proceedings dated 5.10.2015, by adopting Rs. 3,95,272/- as the actual amount of ITC reversed and paid, computed the balance am ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned order contains errors apparent on the face of record and the same has been passed in gross violation of principles of natural justice without conducting an enquiry as contemplated under section 27(2) of the Tamilnadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006. He further submitted that if the respondent had conducted an enquiry under section 27(2) of the A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed an application under Section 84 of the TNVAT Act for the assessment years in question and the said petition was rejected without opportunity. Further, in the impugned order dated 5.10.2015, no suppression of assessable turnover has been established. No enquiry as contemplated under section 27 of the TNVAT Act was conducted for imposing penalty. In view of the same, the impugned order is liable ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
