9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (2) TMI 749X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the petitioner there is a strong presumption that the petitioner deliberately did not account for those transaction in the books of accounts/bills and the sales were clandestine in nature to evade tax. They prima facie indicate that the conduct of the petitioner was to suppress the facts with a view to evade tax. The respondent was therefore entitled to pass a speaking order by drawing adverse inference and confirm the liability as the officers acting under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax, 1959 are expected to pass orders based on the principles of preponderance of probabilities. However, there is no proper discussion in the impugned order. Nevertheless, the petitioner ought to have filed an appeal before the Appellat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 039 of 2010. The said writ petition was disposed with the following observation:- Thereafter, a notice to revise the assessment order was issued to the petitioner on 07.07.2002 which culminated in an assessment order dated 31.03.2010. The said Assessment Order was challenged by the petitioner in W.P.No.15039 of 2010. 3. In the said writ petition, the petitioner had challenged a revision order dated 31.3.2010 passed by the respondent pursuant to re-opening of the assessment under Section 16 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 vide notice dated 7.7.2008 based on the proposal of the Enforcement Wing (South). The said notice reopened the regular assessment made on 16.8.2004. 4. The petitioner appears to have collected ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... here is a strong presumption that the petitioner deliberately did not account for those transaction in the books of accounts/bills and the sales were clandestine in nature to evade tax. They prima facie indicate that the conduct of the petitioner was to suppress the facts with a view to evade tax. 10. The respondent was therefore entitled to pass a speaking order by drawing adverse inference and confirm the liability as the officers acting under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax, 1959 are expected to pass orders based on the principles of preponderance of probabilities. However, there is no proper discussion in the impugned order. Nevertheless, the petitioner ought to have filed an appeal before the Appellate Commissione ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
