9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (8) TMI 105X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ollected all the records and filed the rectification petition along with the records. This would indicate that the petitioner was bonafide in seeking time to furnish all the records. If the petitioner has filed the rectification petition without any records, the claim of the respondent ought to be accepted, but in the present case it is for the genuine reason the petitioner has sought for adjournment. Therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner is entitled to one more opportunity. In the present case, the petitioner has submitted a rectification petition along with the records as well as pointed out several discrepancies such as the respondent has not granted ITC claim wherever it is applicable and imposed tax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f 2023 is filed for the assessment year 2019-2020. 2. The petitioner is the manufacturer and trader of fireworks and is an assessee under the Tamil Nadu Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 bearing Registration No. in GSTIN No.33AAFKV8790QIZ2. The contention of the petitioner is that he used to purchase the raw materials and packing materials for manufacturing of fireworks from registered dealers within the State as well from outside the State. After manufacturing the fireworks, the petitioner sends the same to the registered dealers within the State and also to the registered dealers outside the State. The petitioner is paying the GST by filing monthly returns without default. 3. For the assessment year 2017-2018, 2018-2019 and 2019-2020 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... voluminous records were involved in the present matters, the petitioner was under the bonafide impression that the respondents would grant time for further 10 days. However, the respondents the very next day has passed an order, dated 10.11.2022, by confirming all the proposals and levied tax, interest and penalty which is more than one Crore rupees. Thereafter to rectify the miscalculation of interest an order dated 30.11.2022 was passed. The petitioner filed petitions under section 161 for rectification of the assessment order and the same was rejected vide order dated 01.03.2023. Aggrieved over the above three orders the petitioner has filed the present writ petition. 6. The respondent has filed a counter affidavit stating that based ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... seeking to re-do the entire assessment order which is not admissible. Therefore, the respondent vehemently objected to the rectification petition as well as to interfere with the assessment order. 7. Heard Mr.S.Karunakar, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner in all the writ petitions and Mr.B.Saravanan, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondent in all the writ petitions and perused the records. 8. The contention of the petitioner is that on 10.11.2022 at about 09.19 AM, the petitioner has submitted an adjournment letter and the respondent has received the same. But on the same date, i.e., on 10.11.2022 by 01.22 PM, the respondent has passed the assessment order without considering the adjournment lette ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is entitled to one more opportunity. 11. It is seen the petitioner filed a rectification petition under Section 161. Before filing the rectification petition, the petitioner collected all the records and filed the rectification petition along with the records. This would indicate that the petitioner was bonafide in seeking time to furnish all the records. If the petitioner has filed the rectification petition without any records, the claim of the respondent ought to be accepted, but in the present case it is for the genuine reason the petitioner has sought for adjournment. Therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner is entitled to one more opportunity. 12. In the present case, the petitioner has submitted a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cases where the rectification is purely in the nature of correction of a clerical or arithmetical error, arising from any accidental slip or omission: Provided also that where such rectification adversely affects any person, the principles of natural justice shall be followed by the authority carrying out such rectification. 13. The learned Counsel for the petitioner relied on the judgment of this Court passed in the case of Pinstar Automotive India Private Limited Vs. Additional Commissioner, in W.P.No.8493 of 2023, dated 20.03.2023, reported in 2023(3) TMI 1168, wherein it is held the procedure followed by the authority is clearly contrary to the third proviso to section 161, where the authority proposed to take a view ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
