9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (4) TMI 1103X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nity of personal hearing to the petitioner. Demand of Tax - Engaged in business of providing service of passive telecommunication infrastructure to telecommunication companies - Held that:- in view of the above, the demand notice issued by the 1st respondent is liable to be set aside and accordingly, the same is set aside. - Appeal disposed of - W.P.Nos.10540 to 10543 & 11236 to 11239 of 2016, W.M.P.No.9243 to 9249 & 9753 to 9756 of 2016 - - - Dated:- 4-4-2016 - M. Duraiswamy, J. For the Appellant : Mr. Raghavan Ramabadran For the Respondent : Mr. S Kanmani Annamalai, AGP ORDER W.P.Nos.11236 to 11239 of 2016 are filed by the petitioner to issue writs of certiorari to call for the records relating to the Impugned O ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onstruing the petitioner to be the Seller, proposing to levy tax on the petitioner under Section 5 and Section 22(4) of the TNVAT Act and under Section 27(3) of TNVAT Act for the assessment years 2007-2008 to 2010-2011. The petitioner has sent detailed replies on 03.10.2013. The 1st respondent passed orders on 21.l0.2013 stating that the petitioner has not filed any objection. Aggrieved over the same, the petitioner filed appeals before the 2nd respondent against the orders passed by the 1st respondent, by paying 25% of the tax demand for each of the assessment years towards mandatory pre-deposit. The stay petitions filed by the petitioner were disposed of by the 2nd respondent by granting conditional stay subject to payment another 25% of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pearing for the respondents submitted that since the petitioner was not given an opportunity of personal hearing, the impugned orders dated 27.01.2016 passed by the 2nd respondent may be set aside and the matters may be remitted back to the 2nd respondent for fresh consideration. Further, the learned Additional Government Pleader submitted that in view of the same, the demand notice issued on 11.03.2016 which are challenged in W.P.Nos.10540 to 10543 of 2016 may be set aside. 7. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, taking note of the fact that the petitioner was not given an opportunity of personal hearing by the 2nd respondent, which is violative of principles of natural justice, the impugned order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
