9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (1) TMI 378X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... show that reply was submitted before the office of the 1st respondent only on 04.09.2015. By this time however, the 1st respondent had already passed assessment order, as also issued the notice of demand. Considering the fact that the petitioner had almost two weeks time after the submission of reply and before the 1st respondent passed order, to produce the books of accounts, in order to substant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... quot;KVAT Act", for the assessment year 2012-2013. The grievance of the petitioner in the writ petition is essentially that, prior to passing Ext.P8 order, the petitioner was not afforded an opportunity of being heard and further the petitioner was not given an opportunity to produce the books of accounts and other records to fortify the contentions in the reply submitted to the pre-assessme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ne in the matter by the petitioner even thereafter till 31.08.2015, on which date, Ext.P8 order was passed by the 1st respondent. The petitioner filed Ext.P6 reply, substantially on the same lines as Ext.P5 reply, but adding a sentence therein namely, that the petitioner be provided with an opportunity to produce books of accounts for 2012-2013 along with a personal hearing. The documents produced ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lation of the Rules of Natural Justice while passing Ext.P8 order. The writ petition in its challenge against Ext.P8 order, therefore fails and is accordingly dismissed. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that he would require some time to prefer an appeal against Ext.P8 order of the 1st respondent. Taking note of the said submission, I make it clear that if the petitioner prefer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
