9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (11) TMI 661X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lace of business of the petitioner. As seen from the impugned assessment order, no personal hearing was afforded to the petitioner before passing of the impugned assessment order. This Court is of the considered view that principles of natural justice have been violated by the respondent before passing of the impugned assessment order and therefore, the Writ Petition is maintainable - the matter is remanded back to the respondent for fresh consideration and the respondent shall pass final orders on merits and in accordance with law after affording sufficient opportunity to the petitioner including granting them the right of personal hearing within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Petition allo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... also denied all the allegations contained in the pre revision notice issued by the respondent Department on 07.02.2018. According to the petitioner, despite giving a detailed reply denying their liability as well as categorically submitting, TNVAT Act, 2006 will not get attracted to them, under the impugned assessment order, by total non application of mind to the reply dated 07.03.2018, the respondent has passed the impugned assessment order on the ground that during inspection by the Enforcement Wing Officials of the respondent, the petitioner had accepted the defects pointed out by the respondent by signing a sworn statement. 4.It is the contention of the petitioner that the respondent, while passing the impugned assessment order, ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essment order has been made. According to her, principles of natural justice has not been violated by the respondents. 8.This Court has perused and examined the pre revision notice dated 07.02.2018, the reply dated 07.03.2018 sent by the petitioner as well as the impugned assessment order. The receipt of the reply dated 07.03.2018 sent by the petitioner to the pre revision notice has not been disputed by the respondent as seen from the impugned assessment order. In the reply dated 07.03.2018, the petitioner has categorically submitted that TNVAT Act, 2006, is not attracted to them, since they are only doing the business of cargo handling and are having license for undertaking stevedoring and shore handling operations in VOC Port Trust ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... th regard to the mismatch claim, they have submitted that all the above purchases are store goods such as lubricant oil, grease used for the vehicles running in their site for cargo handling. Hence, according to them, the above purchases were not reported in their monthly Form I returns filed for the year 2014-2015. 11.Even though the petitioner has raised all the aforementioned contentions in the reply dated 07.03.2018 to the pre revision notice, dated 07.02.2018, the respondent under the impugned assessment order has not considered the same, but has passed the assessment order only based on the alleged sworn statements signed by the petitioner at the time of inspection by their Enforcement Wing Officials at the place of business of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
