9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (8) TMI 669X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... after pass a speaking order and the respondent should not have completed the assessments as done in the instant cases. Hence, this Court is not inclined to direct the petitioner to make any further payments, as the petitioner is entitled to an opportunity. In the light of the above, the impugned orders are held to be non speaking orders and are in violation of the principles of natural justice. Writ petitions are allowed - Matter remanded back. - Writ Petition Nos.26361 to 26366 of 2016 & WMP.Nos.22601 to 22606 of 2016 - - - Dated:- 28-7-2016 - T. S. Sivagnanam, J. For the Petitioner : Mr.T.Pramod Kumar Chopda For the Respondent : Mr.S.Kanmani Annamalai, AGP ORDER Mr.S.Kanmani Annamalai, learned Additional Governmen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... though they were unregistered dealers on the date of inspection by the officials of the Enforcement Wing on 8.10.2015. 5. On receipt of the notices dated 11.1.2016, the petitioner submitted a reply dated 25.1.2016 enclosing 8 documents in support of their stand. It is not in dispute that the respondent received the objections dated 25.1.2016. However, for about six months, the matters were in cold storage and the respondent did not take any action. Therefore, the petitioner submitted their further objections dated 28.6.2016. In the objections dated 28.6.2016, apart from other factual and legal aspects, the petitioner stated that the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India has prescribed Accounting Standards for every industry and in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he case of State of Madras Vs. S.G.Jeyaraj Nadar Sons [reported in 28 STC 700]. 8. With regard to the manner, in which, the Assessing Officer has to function, the petitioner pointed out that the respondent should exercise quasi judicial functions as an Assessing Authority. In this regard, the petitioner brought to the notice of the respondent the decision of the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in the case of Madras Granites (P) Ltd. Vs. CTO, Arisipalayam Circle, Salem [reported in 146 STC 642]. 9. Specifically the petitioner requested for an opportunity of personal hearing. It is worthwhile to point out that even in the first objection dated 25.1.2016, the petitioner requested for an opportunity of personal hearing. Admitte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in AS 7(2), which stipulates percentage completion method, the respondent ought to have examined the issue and without doing so, by cryptic orders, could not have rejected the petitioner's contentions. 14. The learned Additional Government Pleader, while supporting the impugned orders, submitted that if the petitioner seeks one more opportunity, they may be directed to pay 50% of the amount demanded in each of the cases and an opportunity may be granted. 15. In reply to such a contention, it is submitted that the petitioner has already paid tax on the deemed sales turnover involved in the execution of works contract as per their accounts. 16. Therefore, if the respondent does not accept the deemed sales turnover as assessed by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
