9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (7) TMI 873X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e can be taken. Thereafter, the subsequent notices dated 14.12.2020 and 16.02.2021 had been sent by RPAD. This service of notice is beyond the period of limitation as contemplated under Section 27 of the Act. Therefore, the respondent cannot reopen the case beyond the period of five years stipulated under Section 27 and no orders can been passed thereafter. In view of the same, the impugned orders are quashed. The Writ Petitions are allowed. - W.P.(MD).Nos.8050, 8052 and 8055 of 2021 And W.M.P.(MD).Nos.6146, 6149 and 6151 of 2021 - - - Dated:- 14-7-2022 - Honourable Mr. Justice M.Nirmal Kumar For the Petitioner : Mr.A.Satheesh Murugan For the Respondent : Mr.C.Satheesh, Government Advocate. (In all Writ Petitions) COM ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... further submitted that the explanation given in their counter is also not sustainable. In paragraph 9 of the counter, it has been stated that the notices dated 27.02.2018 were issued to the dealers by ordinary post and thereafter, on 14.12.2020 and 16.02.2021 were issued by RPAD. In view of the same, the notices dated 27.02.2018, have no significance and it cannot be taken as a proper service of notice. As per Rule 19(c) of the TNVAT Rules, 2007, any communication including notice, summons or orders should be sent to the dealer by registered post. In this case, the notices alleged to have been sent on 27.02.2018 is by ordinary post. Hence, it is not a proper service and it cannot be taken cognizance of. On this ground, the impugned orders a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tices dated: 27.02.2018 issued to the dealer by ordinary post, and 14.12.2020 16.02.2021 issued to the dealer, by RPAD, which were properly served on the dealers and they received the notices, by affixing their name seal. 10)It is submitted that, during the subject assessment year 2010-11, deemed to have finally, assessed under TNVAT Act 2006 as notified by G.O.Ms.No.82 dated: 19.06.2012. In the subject case, revision notice was issued on 27.02.2018 itself (ie on or before 30.06.2018) and reminder notices on 14.12.2020 and 16.02.2021 orders were passed on 19.03.2021 which is not time barred by limitation and hence reversing of ITC levying of interest made is legally correct and is in accordance with law. 11)It is submitted t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
