9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (1) TMI 362X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r for fresh consideration - petition allowed by way of remand. - R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 16238 of 2018 - - - Dated:- 5-12-2018 - MS HARSHA DEVANI AND DR A. P. THAKER, JJ. For The Petitioner : MR AKSHAY A VAKIL(5473) For The Respondents : MR UTKARSH SHARMA, ASSTT. GOVT. PLEADER ORAL ORDER ( PER : HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI) 1. Heard Mr. Akshay Vakil, learned advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Utkarsh Sharma, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent. 2. Rule. Mr. Utkarsh Sharma, learned Assistant Government Pleader waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondent. 3. Having regard to the controversy involved in the present case which lies in a very na ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al Tax, Appeal-1, Ahmedabad (hereinafter referred to as the first appellate authority ) on 06.01.2018, who directed the petitioner to pre-deposit an amount of ₹ 25,00,000/- under the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003 and 20% of the total demand under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. By an order dated 06.01.2018, the first appellate authority dismissed the appeals on the ground of non-payment of the pre-deposit. 5.2 The petitioner carried the matter in second appeal before the Gujarat Value Added Tribunal, who by an order dated 26.03.2018, confirmed the order of the first appellate authority, to the extent it had directed the petitioner to deposit ₹ 25,00,000/- against the total demand of ₹ 2,49,05,537/- within one mont ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... etion and directed the petitioner to make pre-deposit and there being no infirmity in the impugned orders, there is no warrant for interference by this court. 8. It is an admitted position that the proceedings before the Assessing Officer went ex-parte as the petitioner was not served with the assessment notices issued by the concerned authority. It may be that such notice could not be served on account of closure of the business of the petitioner, nonetheless, it is a matter of fact that the assessment was exparte . In these circumstances, this court is inclined to remit the proceedings back to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration and disposal in accordance with law. This is because the assessment order came to be passed ex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
