9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (10) TMI 259X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ection was ever raised by the petitioner-assessee, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner-assessee cannot raise any grievance about no specific Proposition notice was given to him - petitioner-assessee therefore cannot be heard to complain the breach of principles of natural justice by the Respondent-Assessing Authority and not giving him an opportunity to file objections - petition dismissed - decided against petitioner. - Writ Petition No. 41633/2017 (T-RES) - - - Dated:- 18-9-2017 - Vineet Kothari, J. Mr. K.M. Shivayogiswamy, Adv. for Petitioner Mr. T.K.Vedamurthy, AGA for Respondents ORDER 1. The petitioner-M/s.Vishal Concrete Works has filed this petition directly before this Court under Article ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the rate of 25% of the total turnover and VAT at the rate of 13.5% with interest and penalty may not be imposed. 4. The said notice for the period 2010-11 vide Annexure-A dated 14.09.2016 clearly called upon the petitioner-assessee to file objections, if any, to the above proposals within seven days, but no such objections were filed. Again the impugned Endorsement Annexure-B dated 06.12.2016 was issued by the Respondent-Assessing Authority giving further time of 3 days to produce all the Books of Accounts and to file objections. The impugned assessment order records that no objections, as such were filed by the petitioner, however, on the date fixed in the notice in Endorsement dated 06.12.2016, one Sri.Narayan Das R.Raju appeared befo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oner-assessee also himself submitted before the Court that Books of Accounts etc., were produced along with VAT-240 after the Endorsement Annexure-B dated 06.12.2016 after Annexure-A dated 14.09.2016 was served upon the petitioner-assessee, but no separate objections as such were filed. 8. The petitioner-assessee therefore cannot be heard to complain the breach of principles of natural justice by the Respondent-Assessing Authority and not giving him an opportunity to file objections. Even otherwise, this Court is of the opinion that since the impugned reassessment order is appealable to the next higher authority, namely, the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) as per Section 62 of the KVAT Act, 2003, the petitioner-assessee can raise his object ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
