9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (8) TMI 1364X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Petitioner : Mr.V.Sundareswaran For Respondents : Mr.S.Kanmani Annamalai Additional Government Pleader ORDER Heard Mr.V.Sundareswaran, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, and Mr.S.Kanmani Annamalai, learnred Additional Government Pleader, appearing for respondents. 2. The petitioner, who is a registered dealer, on the file of the second respondent, under the provisions of erstwhi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... st under Section 24, sub-section 3 of TNGST Act. In the instant case, undisputed facts are that the petitioner had filed their returns, claimed exemption and ultimately, the tax was remitted, after the legal issue with regard to the manner of taxation on REP was decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court on 01.05.1996. 4. Thus, the question would be as to whether interest is liable to be demanded u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case of E.I.D. Parry India Ltd., (supra), allowed the Writ Petition. In the said case also, there was differential tax amount, payable by the petitioner on account of the dispute raised before this Court as regards the payment of tax. The petitioner therein filed returns and remitted the tax at 4%, as, at the relevant point of time, they enjoyed the benefit of an interim order, which was granted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the tax. However, in the instant case, there is no record to show that provisional assessment was made and the notice calling upon the petitioner to pay the differential rate of tax was only on the ground that the petitioner did not remit 10% tax but remitted only 4% tax. But the petitioner did not admit the return. Therefore, if it is a case where the petitioner admitted the return, the tax liabi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
