9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 205X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the year 2003. Since the fire accident had occurred on 11.01.2002 and the records were gutted as soon as pre-assessment notices were received, the petitioner moved the first respondent through proper channel - to state that the petitioner is guilty of non-production of records at the appropriate time is an incorrect statement since there is no record to show that despite summons being issued to produce the records and books of accounts, the petitioner failed to do so. More importantly, the respondent did not dispute the fire accident and the same is admitted. In such circumstances, every step should be taken by the Assessing Officer as well as other respondents to complete the assessment at an earliest point of time. There is a statutor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the procedure laid down under Section 12 of the TNGST Act r/w. Section 9(2) of the CST Act by adopting the methodology relating to earlier assessment years on par with the relief granted to other assessees facing similar problems. The petitioner approached the first respondent with a request to waive the assessment procedure on account of the fire accident which occurred in the business premises of the petitioner on 11.01.2002. 3.The petitioner's case is that on account of the fire accident, entire records, books of accounts, etc. which were kept in the office premises were gutted down and are not available with the petitioner for production before the Assessing Officer and therefore, requested for waiver of the assessment procedure. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the arrears of tax was to the tune of ₹ 7.65 Crores which came to light only after inspection was conducted in the place of business of the petitioner between 1997 to 2002. Thirdly, it was stated that the order passed in favour of M/s.Binny Mills Limited cannot be applied to the petitioner as it was a case of natural calamity. 4. Learned Additional Government Pleader sought to sustain the impugned order by reiterating the reasons assigned therein. With regard to the allegation that there has been suppression, I find that there was no materials available on record to come to such a conclusion since even as per the pre-assessment notice dated 14.11.2002, there was no allegation of suppression but the exemption claim was sought t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ounts, the petitioner failed to do so. More importantly, the respondent did not dispute the fire accident and the same is admitted. In such circumstances, every step should be taken by the Assessing Officer as well as other respondents to complete the assessment at an earliest point of time. In so far as the petitioner is concerned, for the subsequent periods, namely, 2001-2002 and 2002-2003, assessments were completed on 30.06.2004, 31.01.2005 and 25.03.2005 respectively. The third reason for rejection of the petitioner's application is by stating that the decision taken by the Government in the case of M/s.Binny Mills Limited is not applicable to the petitioner's case since the said case was a case of natural calamity. This is an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
