9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (8) TMI 1201X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n order dismissing the petitioner's revision petition filed against the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner (CT), Chennai Central in R.P.No.63 of 2000, dated 03.11.2005. 3. By dismissing the petitioner's second revision petition, the first respondent has affirmed the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner, dated 03.11.2004, by which the Deputy Commissioner remanded the matter back to the Assessing Officer for fresh disposal to levy the penal interest under Section 24(3) on the basis of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. 4. The case has had a chequered history commencing with a revision notice issued by the third respondent, dated 13.03.2000, for the assessment year 1993-94, alleging that the petitioner has not rep ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er, which was also dismissed and the matter is now pending before the Hon'ble Division Bench in W.A.No.1367 of 2007. Thus, the validity of the assessment order as passed by the Assessing Officer, dated 09.11.2000 is yet to attain a finality. In the instant case, what is challenged is an order demanding interest under Section 24(3) of the TNGST Act. The petitioner's contention is that the elements, which are required to attract interest under Section 24(3) of the Act, are not attracted to the petitioner's case and the legal position as to whether such transactions are taxable, was in a nebulous state, till the Hon'ble Supreme Court decided the same and held that the transactions are exigible to tax from 01.05.1996 and conside ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d under Section 12(2) may within a period of 30 days from the date of service of the assessment order apply to the Assessing Officer for reassessment and such application shall be entertained, only if there is satisfactory proof of payment of tax. 9. In my considered view, Section 14 of the TNGST Act, would have no application to the facts of this case, as the revised return dated 31.03.2000, is not within the period of five years from the date of the original assessment, which is dated 30.09.1994. Though Section 14 speaks of re-assessment still there is an embargo on the part of the Assessing Officer to invoke Section 14 of the TNGST Act and obviously such power could not have been invoked in the instant case. 10. Thus, for all the above ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
