9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (3) TMI 509X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uch opportunity was given by the respondents before passing the impugned order. Therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the respondents have violated the principles of natural justice by not affording adequate opportunity to the petitioner. The matter is remanded back to the respondents to redo the assessment afresh after giving adequate opportunity to the petitioner including the right of personal hearing and pass final orders in accordance with law - petition allowed by way of remand. - W.P.(MD)No.3643 of 2015 And M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2015 - - - Dated:- 18-2-2019 - Mr. Justice Abdul Quddhose For the Petitioner : Mr.B.Rooban For the Respondents : Mr.N.Shanmugaselvam Additional Government Pleader ORDER The i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... M/s.Jagathish Pharmaceuticals. It is the case of the petitioner that during the said assessment year 2012-2013, he has effected sales and purchases only from the Madurai Branch of M/s.Jagathish Pharmaceuticals which has been duly reported to the departments. The second respondent issued a revision notice dated 29.11.2013 alleging that pursuant to the verification of the department web site and the sales details taken from other departments, Annexure-I, a sales turn over to a tune of ₹ 30,84,184/- at 5% to one Sri Muthu Vinayaga Pharmaceuticals (TIN 33145541673) was failed to be reported and the department proposed to levy tax on the same and also penalty at the rate of 150% on the alleged escape of assessment. 6.It is the case o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2013 sent by the petitioner, the entire proposal to levy tax as well as penalty against the petitioner would have been dropped. 10.According to the petitioner, the respondents have not afforded adequate opportunity and have also not conducted proper enquiry in accordance with the provisions of the TNVAT Act, 2006. It is also the case of the petitioner that the respondent ought to have given a right of personal hearing to the petitioner which have been failed to do so in the instant case. Therefore, according to the petitioner, the respondents have violated the principles of natural justice and therefore, they are entitled to file this writ petition. 11.Heard Mr.B.Rooban, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.N.Sha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order. 15. As seen from the provisions of Section 22 r/w Section 27 of the TNVAT Act, 2006, adequate opportunity will have to be granted to the petitioner before any adverse order is passed against them. This Court in an earlier judgment has interpreted the word 'reasonable opportunity' found in Section 27 to mean and include the right of personal hearing. In the instant case, no such opportunity was given by the respondents before passing the impugned order. Therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the respondents have violated the principles of natural justice by not affording adequate opportunity to the petitioner. 16.It is the case of the petitioner that he has already paid the tax as well as the penalty in ter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
