9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (1) TMI 602X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ondent conducted an audit and assessment proceedings on the petitioner, for the tax period from August, 2015 to April 2016, by way of an order dated 13.10.2020. These proceedings were challenged, by the petitioner, before the 3rd respondent, by way of an appeal. The 3rd respondent dismissed the said appeal on 05.07.2023. Aggrieved by the order of assessment dated 13.10.2020 and the order of appeal dated 05.07.2023, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of the present writ petition. 3. The case of the petitioner is that the audit assessment proceedings dated 13.10.2020 are beyond limitation. The petitioner contends that the period of limitation of four years, provided under the Act, is to be computed from the end of each tax perio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rued that there were no objections to the proposed levy of tax and passed the order of assessment dated 13.10.2020 raising a demand of Rs. 37,74,588/-. The 2nd respondent contends that the provisions of Section 21 (5) of the Act would be applicable in view of the fact that there had been willful evasion of tax by the petitioner. 7. A perusal of the show cause notice dated 26.06.2020 reveals that the registration of the petitioner had been cancelled w.e.f., 07.12.2016 and that a best judgment assessment was proposed in view of the fact that none of the details relating to sale turnovers verification of ITC, verification of GIS reports, SIS reports verification could be verified as none of these records were submitted by the petitioner. Show ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (5) of the Act, which gives an extended period of limitation of six years, in the event of evasion of tax by the dealer. In the present case, VAT returns of the petitioner did not disclose any of the turnovers which came to the light on account of the usage of e-weigh bills and the inputs returns of the petitioner. The suppression of turnover, in the VAT returns, filed by the petitioner, is sufficient to hold that there has been evasion of tax. Once there is such evasion of tax, the extended period of limitation of six years, under Section 21 (5) of the Act would be applicable. 13. The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that invocation of Section 21 (5) of the Act should have been mentioned in the show cause notice, failing w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
