9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (7) TMI 1266X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ication of mind on the part of the respondent - assessment order set aside - petition allowed - decided in favor of petitioner. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... input tax credit availed is also bogus and it is in contravention of Section 19(13) & 19(16) of the TNVAT Act and proposed to reverse the input tax credit claimed by the petitioner. After furnishing those details, the respondent directed the petitioner to pay a sum of ₹ 68,93,000/- along with interest. There was a proposal to levy penalty under Section 27(4) of the TNVAT Act, 2006. The petitioner was granted 10 days time to file their objections. The petitioner submitted their objections dated 13.06.2016 pointing out the genuineness of the transaction with those two dealers and stated that they were of the opinion that the invoices are prima facie evidence for claiming input tax credit and all payments to those two dealers were throu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s completed the assessment and though the order of assessment is a 8 page order, the finding rendered by the Assessing Officer is only the bottom of page No.7 of the order. From a perusal of the finding of the respondent is only in one paragraph titled 'Conclusion of the Assessing Officer'. On a reading of the said paragraph, it is evidently clear that the assessment has been completed in a most cryptic and arbitrary manner. None of the contentions raised by the petitioner has been gone into, in fact, when the respondent has recorded that documents relating to transport of goods by M/s.Thejo Engineering were produced for verification, the respondent arbitrarily stated that the petitioner have not contested the matter with documentar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ty formality. That apart, the impugned assessment order has been passed on the same day, when the petitioner submitted his objections dated 15.06.2016. This itself would indicate that the respondent had pre-judged the issue and the action in calling for objection is reduced to an empty formality. Hence, the notice dated 27.05.2016 as well as the impugned assessment order dated 15.06.2016 are held to be bad in law.
5. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed and the impugned assessment order dated 15.06.2016 is quashed and the pre-revision notice dated 27.05.2016 is also quashed. It is open to the respondent to initiate fresh action in accordance with law. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
