9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (12) TMI 689X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Respondents : Mrs. J. Padmavathi Devi Special Government Pleader ORDER This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the impugned demand of the first respondent, dated 17.04.2017 calling upon the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs. 21,33,005/- towards dishonored cheques totally amounting to Rs. 21,33,005/-, which was issued by the petitioner in favour of the first respondent, on the date of inspect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fidavit has been filed by the first respondent. Wherein, they have stated that the petitioner has admitted the tax amount and only thereafter, issued the cheques which were dishonored. Hence, according to them, they are entitled for recovery of the dishonored cheques amounting to Rs. 21,33,005/-. Therefore, according to them, the impugned demand is valid and not illegal as contended by the petiti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt Wing) is illegal. In the counter affidavit filed by the first respondent, in paragraph No.3, the first respondent has admitted that four cheques given by the petitioner on the date of inspection was only towards the payment of tax even though in the impugned demand, they have mentioned that it is towards compounding fees. Since the collection of cheques from the petitioner is admittedly, toward ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Judgment cited by the learned counsel for the petitioner, is of the considered view that the impugned demand made by the respondent is illegal without there being an assessment order. 11. For the foregoing reasons, the impugned demand, dated 17.04.2017 issued by the first respondent is hereby quashed and the Writ Petition is allowed. However, liberty is granted to the respondents to complete t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
