9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (6) TMI 1237X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... moreso because against order rejecting the rectification, it had filed an appeal because according to the Petitioner against such rejection of rectification order no pre-deposit is required to be made. [This clearly shows that the present petition is filed to bypass the mandatory pre-deposit provision in entertaining the appeal]. The issue raised in the assessment order interalia qua circular trading requires factual determination which this Court cannot go into in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It is also important to observe that by various show cause notices, the Petitioner was called upon to file all the evidences in support of its return of income and furthermore order sheet annexed to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Petitioner and learned AGP for the Respondent (State). 3. This Petition challenges an assessment order dated 5th March 2019 for period 2014-15 and an order dated 23rd February 2021 rejecting rectification of the aforesaid assessment. There is a further prayer for issuance of writ of mandamus directing the appellate authority to admit the Appeal without any pre-deposit. 4. Brief facts are as under:- (i). For the period of 2014-15, Respondent No. 2 issued a show cause notice on 23rd March 2017 calling the Petitioner to produce all the evidence in support of its return for the period 2014-15. The said show cause notice was replied by the Petitioner on 19th April 2017 giving various details specified therein. (ii). On 7th July 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dismissed the aforesaid appeal on the ground that since the rectification order has merged with the assessment order and the Petitioner have failed to deposit 10% of tax along with filing of an appeal which is mandatory. 5. The Petitioner would contend that the impugned orders are passed without giving opportunity of hearing insofar as, disallowance of input tax credit qua all the parties is concerned. The Petitioner, therefore, stated that since there is violation of principle of natural justice, this Court should entertain the Writ Petition, although the impugned assessment order is an appealable order. The Petitioner also relied upon the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Tripura Vs. Manoranjan Chakraborty Or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... trading requires factual determination which this Court cannot go into in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It is also important to observe that by various show cause notices, the Petitioner was called upon to file all the evidences in support of its return of income and furthermore order sheet annexed to the Petition records that the Petitioner s accountant refused to sign the proceedings sheet in relation to the circular transaction query raised by Respondent No. 2. Therefore, prima facie, the contention of the Petitioner that opportunity of hearing was not given may not be correct. 9. The decision of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Tripura Vs. Manoranjan Chakraborty Ors. (supra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
