9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (8) TMI 332X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tioner can file a revision under Section 45 of the Puducherry Value Added Tax Act, 2007 – writ petition dismissed. - W.P.No.27189 of 2015 , M.P.Nos.1 and 2 of 2015 - - - Dated:- 5-7-2016 - T. S. Sivagnanam, J. For the Petitioner : Mr. K. V. Subramanian For the Respondents : Mr.M.Govindaraj, G.P.,(Pondy) ORDER Heard Mr.K.V.Subramanian, learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr.R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ths. Thus, the respondent by referring to Section 27(3) of the Pondicherry General Sales Tax Act r/w Section 81 of the Puducherry Value Added Tax Act, 2007 had demanded a sum of ₹ 34,98,465/- to be paid within 15 days, failing which recovery action will be initiated against the petitioner. The order of assessment was passed under the erstwhile Pondicherry General Sales Tax Act, 1967 for the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .07.2011, the petitioner should have remitted the entire remaining tax amount. However, the petitioner remitted the balance 75% of the tax only on 25.10.2011, after which the respondent had issued the impugned notice, calling upon the petitioner to pay the penalty in terms of Section 27(3) of the Act. 4. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that unless there is will ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he penalty. In support of his contention, the learned Government Pleader (Pondicherry) referred to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court made in the case of Calcutta Jute Manufacturing Co. vs. Commercial Tax Officer and other reported in (1973) 106 STC 433 (SC). 6. In the light of the above, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned order. However, this court does not pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
