9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (7) TMI 281X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d they are not eligible for ITC or refund of the tax paid on the purchase of goods including the capital goods. Further, it was pointed out that they have not produced form H to establish their case. Held that:- It is seen that while submitting the objections to the pre-assesment notice, the petitioner in their letter dated 17.03.2016 had requested for personal hearing in the subject column its ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hearing. 2.The petitioner is the registered dealer under the provisions of the Value Added Tax Act, 2006. The petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging the order of assessment dated 29.03.2016, in and by which the input tax credit availed by the petitioner has been reversed and penalty has been imposed. The pre-assessment notice was issued on 01.03.2016 stating that the petitioner is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ported in (2012) 52 VST 286 (Mad). The petitioner would state that admittedly they have sold the goods to an exporter and the exporter have exported the same goods. Therefore, their sale is the last sale preceding to the export sales and squarely falls under Section 5(3) of the CST Act, 1956. Further, it was stated that in respect of the previous years, they have filed appeals before the appellate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the territory of India. This could have been established by the petitioner by appearing in person before the respondent and producing the necessary records. 5.It is seen that while submitting the objections to the pre-assesment notice, the petitioner in their letter dated 17.03.2016 had requested for personal hearing in the subject column itself, though not in the body of the letter. Therefo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
