9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 4X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... AT Act to see as to whether any error which is apparent on the face of the assessment order - the proper course to be adopted by the second respondent is to consider the petition and take a decision on the same and by passing a reasoned order - only issue to be seen is whether the petitioner had produced the original Form-C and Form-F declarations before the learned Departmental representative, wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0-2011 was dismissed. 4.Though the petitioner has raised several grounds challenging the order passed by the appellate authority on merits, the petitioner would state that they would be satisfied if the second respondent is directed to consider their petition filed under Section 84 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 ( TNVAT Act in short) dated 01.08.2015. In the said petition, the pet ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orm-C declaration and Form-F declaration to the extent of ₹ 25,57,538/- and ₹ 21,82,251/- which was also verified by the learned Departmental representative and therefore, it is submitted that this error may be rectified in the impugned order. Though this petition had been submitted on 01.08.2015 and received in the office of the second respondent, as could be seen from the endorsement ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ond respondent proposes to examine it by themselves, then the second respondent can direct the petitioner to produce the same. In any event, the petition filed under Section 84 of the TNVAT Act has to be disposed of on merits and in accordance with law. 6. In the light of the above, there will be a direction to the second respondent to consider the petitioner's petition dated 01.08.2015 and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
