9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (11) TMI 1076X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the tax was paid after inspection and before the assessment order dated 29.12.2017 was passed under Section 22(5) of the TNVAT Act, 2006. The question of filing a revised return on 31.07.2016 was also not available in view of the Rule 7(9) of the TNVAT Rules, 2007. As per Rule 7(9) of the TNVAT Rules, 2007, only if a return was filed and the dealer finds any omission or error, he can file a revised return rectifying the omission or error within a period of six months from the last day of the relevant period to which the return relates. Revised return cannot be filed if the tax payable is unearthed on account of an inspection or audit or receipt of any other information or evidence by the assessing authority. The question of self assessment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... years 2015-16 and 2016-17. It appears that the petitioner had registered itself as an assessee under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 but has failed to file return in time. The Department inspected the premises of the petitioner on 15.07.2016 where they found that out of 72 machineries which were imported by the petitioner from China, 30 were used for their own purposes and the remaining 42 were sold to third parties during these assessment years. The petitioner purportedly filed a return on 31.07.2016 and thereafter paid the tax on the sales effected by the petitioner dealer during these assessment years. This has culminated in the assessment order dated 29.12.2017 wherein penalty was imposed under Section 22(5) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in (2009) 13 SCC 448 and the decision of Division Bench of this Court in the case of the M/s.Gurusamy Agencies Vs. The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer in W.A.No.1237 of 2017 . 5. We have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the respondent and have also perused the provisions of Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 and Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Rules, 2007. 6. The petitioner cannot escape from the penal consequence under Section 22(5) of the TNVAT Act, 2006 merely because the tax was paid after inspection and before the assessment order dated 29.12.2017 was passed under Section 22(5) of the TNVAT Act, 2006. The question of filing a revised return on 31.07.2016 was also not available in vie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... evasion was noticed during inspection has been admitted. The fact remains that the tax was not paid in time and tax has been paid pursuant to the inspection on 15.07.2016. The return that was purportedly filed on 31.07.2016 is not a return recognized under the provisions of TNVAT Rules, 2007. It was not return in the eye of law. The decision rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the context of Section 16 of TNGST Act, 1959 which was followed by the Division Bench of this Court in Ram Sun Fabi Techs Case cited supra cannot be applied to the facts of these cases as the provisions are different. On the other hand, the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India Vs. Rajasthan Spinning and Weaving Mills referre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
