9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (10) TMI 882X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t reported in the return as transit sale, were assessed to tax and requisite amount of tax has already been paid. There has been violation of principles of natural justice, and the petitioner did not have adequate opportunity to putforth their plea in spite of specific request made to the respondent for being heard in person. This Court is convinced that the matter should be remitted back to the Assessing Officer for redoing the assessment in accordance with law - petition allowed by way of remand. - W.P. Nos. 25927 and 25928 of 2017 W.M.P.No.27475 and 27476 of 2017 - - - Dated:- 4-10-2017 - T. S. Sivagnanam , J. For the Petitioner : Mr. S. Mohan For the Respondent : Mr. S. Kanmani Annamalai ORDER Heard Mr.S.Mohan, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r sales, effected by them through transit sales, the same were duly admitted in their returns, and the other turnover, which was not reported in the return as transit sales, the entire tax liability has been remitted by them, and the same shown in the returns, and assessment have been completed. In this regard, the petitioner undertook to produce the entire records for the turnover admitted in the returns and to show that the tax was already paid. Therefore, it was contended that, there cannot be any further assessment in respect of the turnover and consequently, levy of tax is not warranted. 3.2 So far as the allegation that they have collected tax at 2% on the sales turnover from the buyers and claimed exemption under Section 6(2) of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of hearing was received by the petitioner only on 23.08.2017 at about 1.45 p.m. Therefore, the respondent could have either issued another notice or directed the petitioner to appear before him on a particular date, so that the petitioner would be able to produce records to substantiate their stand in their reply, dated 10.07.2017. With regard to the merits of the matter, the respondent has found fault with the petitioner in having produced the letter from the buyers, rectifying the defects in Form C. The petitioner explained that the defect has occurred on account of the purchasing dealer, and it is they, who have to rectify the defect. In that regard, the petitioner produced a letter from the dealer. Further, the petitioner explained that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
