9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (8) TMI 1021X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed dealer under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 (in short "the Act") and the Central Excise Act, 1956, and they have been filing monthly returns within the time stipulated under the respective statutes. The petitioner is engaged in the manufacture of HDPE and PP bags and their goods are sold within the State of Tamil Nadu as well as Interstate. The petitioner also stock transfers the goods to their other branches. 3. The petitioner's case is that they have manufactured goods by purchasing raw materials through interstate sales against Form C declarations and stock transfer the deficiency goods, against all items, to their branches situated outside the state of Tamil Nadu and availed Input Tax Credit. The good ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n respect of the CST sales against C forms. 5. The respondent did not take any action on the reply nor afforded any opportunity of personal hearing and after about five months, a revised revision notice, dated 29.05.2017, was issued. This revised revision notice is identical to that of the revision notice dated 26.10.2016, except for the word "revised" having been added in the notice. The petitioner submitted their objections dated 14.06.2017 and a perusal of which shows that apart from the objections raised in their reply dated 15.12.2016, certain other aspects have also been dealt with by the petitioner. The petitioner has also relied on various decisions of this Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The objections were served in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessee produce as an endorsement before this Court, the Court will be inclined to accept the same as sufficient proof to show that reply was received in the Office of the Assessing Officer. Therefore, the reply, dated 14.06.2017, having been received in the Office of the respondent, the respondent was duty bound to consider the same and should not have passed the impugned order, without even referring to the said reply. 8. One more aspect that need to be pointed out is with regard to the opportunity of personal hearing. In the revised revision notice, dated 29.05.2017, the respondent has stated that the dealers will be afforded opportunity of being personally heard within the time limit provided for submitting the objections. The manner in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
