9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (3) TMI 699X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s not been given an opportunity of hearing on several aspects of the matter, he could be permitted to make his submission to the concerned authority in due course, so the opportunity of further hearing is provided and the impugned order is quashed. - Decided in favour of petitioner - Writ Petition No.11151/2016, Writ Petition Nos.12130-12140/2016 (T-RES) - - - Dated:- 4-3-2016 - Anand Byrareddy, J. For the Appellant : Sri V S Harish, Adv. For the Respondent : Sri S V Girikumar, Additional Govt. Adv. ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. Government Advocate is directed to take notice. 2. The petition coming on for preliminary hearing is considered for final disposal. 3. The petitioner claims that it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rores which was thereafter revised to ₹ 95.76 crores and claimed deduction/exemption of the same. 4. The Joint Commissioner of Commercial Tax (enforcement West Zone, Mangalore) had issued a notice in Form VAT 275 dated 7.3.2011 calling for production of books of accounts and other documents of the petitioner. However, the proceedings were dropped in view of the directions of the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes. Thereafter a notice in Form VAT 275 dated 20.7.2012 was issued by the respondent and yet again another notice dated 20.9.2012 was issued by the respondent to the petitioners. The petitioner did meet the respondent. The petitioner was required to submit the methodology adopted for execution of the contract. The petitioner ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... flected under the head cost of EIL represents professional charges and do not represent consideration for transfer of property in goods and that notice has erroneously adopted figures from the monthly statements which are cumulative in nature and do not represent the actual value of goods sold during a particular month. The petitioner thereafter sought further time to file detailed objections. However, the respondent issued endorsement intimating the petitioner that they may file objections on or before 15.12.2015, failing which the proceedings will be continued without further intimation. 6. However, the petitioner did file their reply highlighting several grounds on which the present petition is filed. The respondent having overlooked ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
