9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (7) TMI 465X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nsidered. Instead, the petitioner has been blamed for not producing purchase invoices. In case, any shortcoming was noticed in the documents filed by the petitioner, the petitioner could have been called upon to produce such documents such as purchase invoices. However, in the impugned order, the shortcoming has been pointed out for the first time. The impugned Assessment Orders are set aside and the cases are remitted back to the second respondent to pass fresh orders on merits within a period of 3 months from the date of disposal of this order - Petition disposed off by way of remand. - Hon'ble Mr. Justice C. Saravanan For the Petitioner in both W.Ps. : Mr. S. Rajasekar For the Respondents in both W.Ps. : Mr. R. Suresh Kumar Additio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2006-2007. v. Actual Asset-cum-Depreciation Account for the year 2006-2007. vi. Details of tax paid to the demo vehicles. vii. Ledger Accounts for the year 2006-07, which is the basis for the Asset Account for the year 2006-07 for which taxes are paid. viii. Copy of Ledger Adhayam Account during the year 2006-07. ix. Ledger Account of the Discount allowed to the customers on various counts. i. Mis-matching list furnished by the department. ii. Final Account Statements for the year 2007-08. iii. List of purchases of materials reflected in Annexure-I and included in Workshop Expenses in Final Account for the year 2007-08. iv. Balance Sheet for the year 2007-08. v. Asset-cum-Depreciation Statement as prepared by the Charted Accountant for Inco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t violation of principles of natural justice inasmuch as the petitioner has produced documents mentioned above along with the reply dated 13.02.2019. These have not been considered. Instead, the petitioner has been blamed for not producing purchase invoices. In case, any shortcoming was noticed in the documents filed by the petitioner, the petitioner could have been called upon to produce such documents such as purchase invoices. However, in the impugned order, the shortcoming has been pointed out for the first time. 7. Considering the same, the impugned Assessment Orders are set aside and the cases are remitted back to the second respondent to pass fresh orders on merits within a period of 3 months from the date of disposal of this order. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
