9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (5) TMI 561X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... purchase tax. Therefore, levying purchase tax also will have to go. But then, this Court accepts the submission of the petitioner's counsel that the impugned proceedings will have to be questioned on the ground of change of opinion. The impugned orders would indicate that the revision is an outcome of the verification of the assessment records. It is also a fact that the assessing officer proceeded based on the web report which indicates mismatch. Therefore, the impugned proceedings cannot be characterized as being grounded only on change of opinion. The matter is remitted to the file of the second respondent to pass orders afresh in accordance with law - Petition allowed by way of remand. - W.P.(MD)Nos.19701, 20826,27058 & 27059 o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... enquiry and a detailed intra-department enquiry shall by conducted before making an assessment based on the web report. The learned counsel for the petitioner would also rely upon the similar order of this Court made in batch of Writ Petitions in W.P(MD)Nos.16874 to 16878 of 2018 etc.,and would pray to quash the impugned orders. 4.The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents would reiterate the contentions set out in the counter affidavit. She would produce the latest circular No.5 of 2021 LW10/12521/2016, dated 24.02.2021 issued by the Office of the Principal Secretary/Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Chennai before this Court, wherein, procedure has been evolved for all the pending and future litigations perta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e, respectfully following the aforesaid decisions, the orders of penalty imposed in these writ petitions stand set aside. 5.A mere look at the impugned orders indicates that the impugned exercise was undertaken not pursuant to any discovery of new material. The very recital paragraph starts as follows:- Verification of the assessment records reveals that... It has been consistently held that the reopening of assessment by change of opinion is impermissible. This proposition was reiterated by the Honourable Supreme Court in the decision reported in (1993) V.S.T.441 (Ravi Prakash Refineries (P) Ltd, Vs.State of Karnataka). 6.The learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioners also placed reliance on the decision ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7.Admittedly, in all these cases, penalty has been imposed vide separate orders. It has been held that when imposing penalty under Section 27 of the Act, the same will have to form part of the assessment order and they cannot be levied though a separate order. Therefore, imposition of penalty in these cases is bad in law. Likewise, the petitioners being works contractors engaged in civil construction, cannot be levied with purchase tax. Therefore, levying purchase tax also will have to go. But then, this Court accepts the submission of the petitioner's counsel that the impugned proceedings will have to be questioned on the ground of change of opinion. The impugned orders would indicate that the revision is an outcome of the verifi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
