9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (4) TMI 280X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ether the percentage of loss of materials (invisible loss) as computed by the respondent is correct? - effect of Section 19(2)(5) of the Act - Held that: - Though on the date when the impugned order was passed, the decision in the case of Interfit Techno Products Ltd. Vs.Principal Secretary/Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai and another [2015 (4) TMI 935 - MADRAS HIGH CO ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... katesh, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent in all WPs. 2. The petitioner is a registered dealer on the file of the respondent under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006. The petitioner is aggrieved by the orders of assessment dated 29.05.2017 and 02.06.2017 respectively, passed under the provisions of Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, for the Assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ities were not justified in adopting the uniform percentage, on invisible loss and calling upon the dealer to reverse or refund the input - tax credit availed of to that extent; whether it was invisible loss or whether it was destruction loss or whether it would fall within any one of the parameters specified in sub-section (9) of section 19 of the Act, being a question of fact, had to be establis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as the second issue is concerned, the Learned counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that writ appeals have been preferred by the State, against the order in the case of Everest Industries Limited Vs. State of Tamil Nadu And Another, and the appeals are yet to be numbered. 7. Be that as it may, as on date, the writ appeals filed by the state challenging the correctness of the decision in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
