9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 462X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... roduce the necessary records, as they have addressed their suppliers and they are in the process of gathering details - petition allowed - matter remanded. - Writ Petition Nos. 37355, 37524, 37555 to 37558 of 2016 & W. M. P. Nos. 32006, 32153, 32181 to 32184 of 2016 - - - Dated:- 26-10-2016 - T. S. Sivagnanam, J. For the Petitioner : Mr. Joseph Prabakar For the Respondent : Mr. K. Venkatesh ORDER Heard Mr.Joseph Prabakar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.K.Venkatesh, learned Government Advocate (Taxes), appearing for the respondent, in all the writ petitions. By consent of the learned counsel for both sides, the writ petitions are taken up for final disposal. 2. The petitioner, in all these writ p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... petitioner had not filed C-Forms. Thus, the assessments sought to be re-opened was largely on the ground of mis-match between the annexures of the petitioner and the selling dealers. The other issues are only marginal. 6. On receipt of the pre-revision notices, the petitioner submitted their interim reply, dated 20.09.2016, stating that so far as the purchases effected from the registration cancelled dealers are concerned, the petitioner had voluntarily reversed the input tax credit and it was pointed out that the cheques for such reversal have been handed over to the Enforcement Wing Officials. With regard to the mis-match, as pointed out in the pre-revision notices, the petitioner stated that they have sent letters to the respecti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as been done by the respondent is clearly an abdication of his statutory duties. 8. With regard to the assessment year 2014-15, while issuing pre-revision notice, dated 04.08.2016, the respondent stated that the petitioner has reported purchases from certain dealers during the said year and availed input tax credit of ₹ 10,17,42,166/- and on receipt of the same, the petitioner, while submitting their objections, dated 20.09.2016, specifically stated (in their objections for 2014-15) that, by mistake, they have shown the input tax credit as ₹ 10,59,93,960/-, instead of ₹ 12,52,677/-, in Annexure A-I. However, in Form I, the input tax credit has been correctly shown as ₹ 12,52,677/-. Though the petitioner specifical ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
