9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (12) TMI 1187X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t Government Pleader, Commercial Tax, for the respondents. 2. The petitioner has moved the court for the following relief: "to issue a Writ Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in passing CST assessment Orders for the Financial Year 2016-17 vide AO. No.209083, dated 30.05.2020 and Financial Year 2017-18 vide A.O.No.209292 dated 30.05.2020 without considering the submitted Bill of Entries on 03.04.2020, without providing opportunity of personal hearing, without passing any order on the e-mail representation dated 20.03.2020, without considering Global Carona pandemic and issuing endorsements vide TIN.37180129845/2016-17, dated 23.09.2021 and TIN.37180129845/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dated 13.03.2020 was issued directing the petitioner to appear for personal hearing on 23.03.2020 before the authorities along with copies of bill of entry and to produce the book of account for final check. It reveals that the total turnover was beyond the exemption which could be allowed and thus an order of assessment was passed. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that after receiving the final show cause notice dated 13.03.2020, they had sent an e-mail on 20.03.2020 to the authorities concerned for extending the time till 30.04.2020, in view of global pandemic, for submission of all bill of entries for all the financial years. It was submitted that on 03.04.2020 partial bills of entries for the said period were sent throu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... proceedings due to Covid-19 virus and resultant difficulties faced by the litigants across the country, where the limitation for questioning such proceedings was extended from time to time and thus, it was submitted that the present writ petition has also been filed on 23.11.2021 as the last extension was till 02.10.2021. It was submitted that the petitioner has also been persuading respondent no.2 to reconsider the impugned order which has not been done forcing the petitioner to approach the Court. 8. Leaned Assistant Government Pleader submitted that the petitioner being a Central Government undertaking is required to act responsibly. It was submitted that the contention of there being no physical service of notice is totally misconceiv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ised return as the fact in the present case. Further, the petitioner herein, despite filing a revised return, had also not deposited the tax for which he was liable as per the revised return, which was suo motu filed by it. Thus, there has been lapse on the part of the petitioner which now is sought to be explained as a mistake and error committed by the petitioner. Once the petitioner itself admits that there were lapses and error on its part, it cannot be termed that there has been gross miscarriage of justice by the authorities requiring interference by the High Court at the very first instance. Moreover, at the cost of repetition, all the points available to the petitioner which have also been argued before the Court can very well to be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
