9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (4) TMI 744X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt year 2009-10. 2. The tax case revision was admitted on 22.09.2020 on the following substantial questions of law: (i) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in having endorsed the view of the 1st Appellate Authority that fresh materials have been produced for the first time in the Appellate forum contrary to Section 63(3) of the TNVAT Act, 2006? 2. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in having rejected the reasons put forth by the petitioner for the failure to furnish their objections before the Assessing Officer? 3. Whether the Tribunal was legally justified in construing sub-section section (2) & (3) of Section 63 as enforcing a total bar on production?" ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essee is no longer res integra and has been decided in several cases in favour of the assessee, holding that the First Appellate Authority or the Tribunal has requisite power to find out whether any register, record, account book or document produced before it was genuine, so as to find out whether the assessee was entitled to certain concession or benefit. 7. In this regard, it is beneficial to refer to the decisions of the Division Bench of this Court in the cases of The Deputy Commissioner (C.T.), Coimbatore Division, Coimbatore-2 Vs. New Ajantha Wines [(1979) 44 STC 327], State of Tamil Nadu Vs. Shah Moolchand Kasthurchand and another [(2010) 33 VST 529] and the recent decision of this Court in T.C.R.Nos.11 to 15 of 2020, dated 03.02.2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ord, account book or document produced before it was genuine so as to find out as to whether the assessee was entitled to certain concession or benefit under the Act. 8. We may also refer to another decision of this Court in the case of Controller of Estate Duty, Madras Vs. R.Saraswathi Ammal [reported in (1977) 110 ITR 525]. While dealing with the case under Section 58(4) of the Excise Duty Act, 1953, it was held that the Appellate Authority had jurisdiction to entertain the materials produced by the accountable person and that the powers of the Appellate Authority were co-extensive with that of the Original Authority. 9. A reference may be made to the decision of the Hon'ble Full Bench of this Court in the case of State of Tamil N ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4, which aspect has not been examined by the Tribunal. Hence, on the said score also, the petitioner - assessee is bound to succeed. 11. In fine, the finding rendered by the Tribunal on the first issue with regard to Section 63 of the Act is held to be not sustainable and accordingly, the same is set aside. " 8. In the light of the above decision, it has to be necessarily held that the First Appellate Authority as well as the Tribunal can receive documents subject to the genuinity being proved. In the order passed by the First Appellate Authority, dated 13.12.2021, it is stated that the materials produced by the assessee/dealer before the First Appellate Authority cannot be considered as genuine. However, this finding does not stem out o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
