9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (6) TMI 1201X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pugned orders clearly shows the reason that the certificates of registration of the dealers have been cancelled, reversal of ITC has to be effected against the petitioner. The said approach adopted by the Assessing Officer is contrary to the settled legal position - the impugned orders are liable to be set aside and accordingly, the same are set aside. Petition allowed. - W.P.Nos.17567 and 17568 of 2015 And M.P. Nos. 1 of 2015 - - - Dated:- 19-6-2015 - MR. T.RAJA, J. For Petitioner : Mr.T.Pramodkumar Chopda For Respondent : Mr.S.Kanmani Annamalai, AGP(Taxes) COMMON ORDER Heard Mr.T.Pramodkumar Chopda, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.S.Kanmani Annamalai, learned Additional Government Pleader (Taxes ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itioner's premises from 24.02.2014. Based on the said inspection, the respondent issued notices, proposing to reverse the claim of ITC with penalty thereon. 3.2 Learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that immediately after the issuance of notices dated 18.09.2014, which were served on the petitioner on 19.09.2014, the petitioner had filed its reply/objections, however, the respondent passed orders dated 02.12.2014, which were received on 13.02.2014, without affording an opportunity to the petitioner. 3.3 According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, challenging the said orders dated 02.12.2014, the petitioner has come before this Court by filing W.P.Nos.783 and 784 of 2015 and this Court, by order dated 19. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pted, only the sole ground that registration certificates of the dealers have been cancelled, the respondent has come forward to pass the wrong impugned orders. Therefore, the same are liable to be quashed. 4. In support of the above submissions, the learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to the following Judgments:- (i) Sri Vinayaga Agencies vs. Assistant Commissioner (CT), Vadapalani I Assessment Circle,Chennai and another reported in [2013] 60 VST 283 (Mad)., (ii) Althaf Shoes (P) Ltd., vs. Assistant Commissioner (CT), Valluvarkottam Assessment Circle, Chennai reported in [2012] 50 VST 179(Mad) and (iii) M/s Aassaan Global Trade rep. by its Prop. M.V.A.Seetharamaraju vs. The Assistant Commiss ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... N:33710846220 M/s Asthalaxmi Enterprises TIN:33760782318 M/s Global Impex TIN:33391352639 M/s Sri Ram Enterprises TIN:33510341154 M/s Lotus Traders TIN:33480100659 M/s Sri Balaji Traders TIN:33731088515 M/s R.N.Enterprises TIN:33771088493 When the purchases of goods from the above dealers were duly entered and reflected in the accounts and monthly returns filed, giving details of purchasers including the registration particulars, commodity code, value, rate of tax, amount of VAT and category of good ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... elling dealer for recovery of tax in the manner known to law. The provision under which the present action has been initiated, namely, invoking sub-section (16) of section 19, does not appear to be correct on the admitted facts as above. All the revision orders revising the input tax credit on the admitted case of tax having been paid to the selling dealer, therefore, are found to be totally incorrect, erroneous and contrary to the provisions of the TNVAT Act and Rules. As a result, all the orders are liable to be set aside . 7. In the light of the above, the impugned orders are liable to be set aside and accordingly, the same are set aside. The writ petitions are allowed. However, it is open to the respondent to proceed against the deal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
