9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (11) TMI 283X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oner is before this Court seeking the following prayer. "a) Issue Writ of Certiorari or directions in the nature of Certiorari to quash the impugned reassessment order passed by the first respondent in relation to the assessment period 2010-11 bearing CAS order No 279028069 dated 20.03.2017 vide Annexure 'A'. b) Issue Writ of Certiorari or directions in the nature of Certiorari to quash the impugned appellate order passed by the 2nd respondent in relation to the assessment period 2010-11 bearing Appeal No. APL/VAT-03/2023-24 dated 28.05.2024 vide Annexure-C. c) Issue such other order or directions as deemed fit in the circumstances of the case." 2. The petitioner is assessed to Karnataka Value Added Tax and bears a TIN no. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al tax payable along with interest and penalty is Rs .912462=00. Intimate the order accordingly. Sd/- Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Tax (Audit), Karwar." 4. The petitioner claims to be unaware of the said order. The said submission stands to reason for the fact petitioner comes to know of the order so passed quoted supra, when the JMFC initiated recovery proceedings against the petitioner. The petitioner then approaches the Appellate Authority, the Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes. The appeal comes to be dismissed by recording the following reasons. "In the instant case the respondent after providing sufficient time of 7 years to produce books of accounts and documentary evidence towards input credit of 4 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation for being filed beyond 30 days and beyond the condonable period of 180 days under the KVAT Act, 2003. The answer to the point is in affirmative for the following reasons. 1. The appellant is the proprietorship concern registered under KVAT Act with TIN No. 29340581049 and trader in electronics goods and home appliances. 2. Due to non-production of books of accounts by the appellant the respondent passed the ex-parte order rejecting the ITC claim by the appellant and issued Form Vat 180 levying tax of Rs. 4,15,003/-penalty Rs. 41,504/- and interest Rs. 4,55,958/- totally Rs. 9,12,462/-. The order and demand notice in Form VAT-180 were served to the appellant on 30-03-2017. 3. As per the request letter dtd 14-08-2023 seeking ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... U/s 39 of KVAT Act, dated: 24.03.2017 for the tax period under appeal. Hence, the following order. ORDER The appeal is dismissed as barred by limitation.". 5. The appeal is dismissed solely on the score that the appeal is preferred beyond period of limitation i.e., 180 days of the passage of the order by the Assistant Commissioner quoted supra. 6. As submitted by learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the Assistant Commissioner himself has recorded that no notice was served upon the petitioner. If that be so, the original order is passed without hearing the petitioner, and is in violation of principles of natural justice. In that light, the petitioner preferring an appeal after six years cannot be pointed against him, for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
