9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 401X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ning the petitioner to the 1st respondent and on receipt of the same, the 1st respondent, after making thorough study of the entire proceedings, shall proceed in accordance with law - appeal allowed by way of remand. - W.P.Nos.42086 to 42095/2016 and WMP.Nos.35995 to 36004/2016, W.P.No.42086/2016 - - - Dated:- 30-11-2016 - T. S. Sivagnanam, J. For the Petitioner : Mr.P.Rajkumar For the Respondents : Mr.K.Venkatesh ORDER Heard Mr.P.Rajkumar, the learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr.K.Venkatesh, the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents and with the consent on either side, the Writ Petitions are taken for disposal. 2. All these Writ Petitions have been filed by the petitioner, challenging the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Original Assessing Officer has completed the assessments and since there were certain errors in the said orders, the petitioner filed petitions to rectify the orders of assessment by invoking Section 84 of the TNVAT Act. The said petitions were dismissed by an order dated 23.02.2015, since the petitioner's authorized representative did not appear before the 2nd respondent. These orders were put to challenge by the petitioner in W.P.Nos.34093 to 34102 of 2016 and the said writ petitions were disposed of by a common order dated 28.09.2016 by setting aside the orders passed by the Revisional Authority subject to condition that the petitioner remits a sum of ₹ 4,00,000/- (Rupees Four Lakhs Only) towards the disputed interest, within a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1st respondent, after making thorough study of the entire proceedings, shall proceed in accordance with law. 11. The petitioner has also filed W.P.No.42091/2016 wherein they have challenged the order passed by the 2nd respondent imposing penalty upon the petitioner by way of a separate order. This is challenged on several grounds, in particular, that an order of penalty cannot be passed separately by a separate order, that too, invoking Section 22(5) of the TNVAT Act. 12. To support such contention, the learned Counsel for the petitioner referred to a decision of the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in the case in The Deputy Commissioner (C.T.), Coimbatore v. V.S.R.Ramaswami Chettiar and Brothers reported in (1976) 38 STC 382 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
