9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (6) TMI 62X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ctions 39(1), 36 and 72(2) of KVAT Act, 2003. Further the representative of the petitioner appeared before the respondent assessing authority and produced the books of accounts. Therefore, the petitioner cannot contend that there is violation of principles of natural justice. Section 52 of the KVAT Act, provides for an appeal before the First Appellate Authority and the petitioner can very well raise all such objections including the violation of principles of natural justice before the Appellate Authority. In view of availability of an alternative efficacious remedy of appeal to the petitioner, the learned Single Judge has rightly dismissed the writ petition with liberty to raise such objections before the next Higher Authority. Appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ioner that ex-parte proposition notice was issued on 14.09.2016 and the said notice was received on 24.09.2016. By letter dated 25.10.2016, the petitioner sought for some time to produce the books of accounts. On 06.12.2016, the 2nd respondent issued notice to produce the books of accounts within three days. Thereafter, the petitioner produced the necessary books of accounts. It is stated that after verification of books of accounts, the respondents-authority has not issued any proposition notice for reassessment. The petitioner had also claimed refund of ₹ 3,03,691/- and the same was rejected without any notice. It is stated that the respondents authority unilaterally rejected the claim of refund of input tax credit of ͅ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itioner has produced the books of accounts before the assessing authority. Hence, prays for dismissal of the writ appeal. 6. On hearing learned counsels for the parties and on going through the writ appeal papers, we are of the view, that the order of the learned Single Judge would not suffer from any error or perversity. The learned Single Judge has rightly dismissed the writ petition observing that the petitioner has an efficacious alternative remedy of raising such objections before the next higher authority. For the assessment year 2010-11 the petitioner had filed returns of turnover under Section 35 of KVAT Act and had paid taxes. The petitioner was issued proposition notice under Section 52(1) of the KVAT Act for production ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
