9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (6) TMI 1189X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t should have given such an information to the appellant, so that the appellant could have approached the Indian Oil Corporation Ltd and obtained the details. This was not done, and instead, the first respondent rejected the request made by the appellant and proceeded to pass Ext.P5 order of assessment fastening huge liability on the appellant towards tax and interest. This is untenable - Ext.P5 o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... details sought for by her and requesting the extension of time for submitting her reply. The learned single Judge rejected the challenge and dismissed the writ petition relegating the appellant to pursue her statutory remedies. It is aggrieved by this judgment, the appeal is filed. 2. We heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d by the learned single Judge. 4. Having heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents, we find that in Exts.P1 and P5, the tax and interest has been demanded from the appellant on the ground that she had suppressed huge turnover of her business of sale of LPG manufactured and marketed by the Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. The details ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tead, the first respondent rejected the request made by the appellant and proceeded to pass Ext.P5 order of assessment fastening huge liability on the appellant towards tax and interest. This, according to us, is untenable. For that reason, we are inclined to agree with the learned counsel for the appellant that Ext.P5 order was passed in violation of the principles of natural justice. Accordingly ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
