9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (2) TMI 654X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pellate authority declined to receive the statutory appeal - HELD THAT:- The documents on record include the receipt evidencing payment of a sum of Rs. 2,53,540/- by the petitioner. The tax liability, as per the impugned assessment order, is a sum of Rs. 10,14,136/-. Thus, the amount paid is about 25% of the disputed tax. This pre deposit satisfies the requirements of Section 51 of the TNVAT Act. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... etitioner in both WP's : Mr.T.Ramesh For the Respondent in both WP's : Mr.C.Harsha Raj, AGP (T) COMMON ORDER In W.P.No.2624 of 2024, an assessment order dated 04.10.2023 is assailed, whereas in W.P.No.2629 of 2024, a notice dated 05.01.2024 by which the appellate authority declined to receive the statutory appeal is assailed. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impug ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3. Mr.C.Harsha Raj, learned Additional Government Pleader, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent. By inviting my attention to the impugned assessment order, he points out that the tax proceedings pertain to the period 01.04.2017 to 30.06.2017, which is the pre-GST period. He also points out that the percentage of pre-deposit of the disputed tax indicates that the petitioner is aware that th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... priate case to direct the appellate authority to receive and dispose of the appeal on merits without going into the aspect of limitation. 5. Accordingly, the order impugned in W.P.No.2629 of 2024 is quashed and the appellate authority is directed to receive and dispose of the statutory appeal on merits after providing a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner. In view thereof, W.P.No.2624 of 202 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
