Home Case Index All Cases VAT and Sales Tax VAT and Sales Tax + HC VAT and Sales Tax - 2022 (3) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (3) TMI 1314 - MADRAS HIGH COURTRecovery of arrears of tax - communication dated 04.05.2009, did not accompany a fresh Form B-6 under Rule 18(8) of the TNGST Rules - whether the notice dated 04.05.2009, was sufficient so as to attract liability under Section 26 (4) of the TNGST Act, 1959? - HELD THAT:- A reading of Section 26 of the TNGST Act makes it clear that the assessing authority may at any time or from time to time, amend or revoke any such notice or extend the time for making any payment in pursuance of the notice. In this case, though in the original notice, the amount was confined for a paltry amount of ₹ 2,00,000/-, the facts on record indicate that a subsequent notice was issued on 04.05.2009, which made it amply clear that the third respondent was in arrears of ₹ 79,13,281/- to the Commercial Taxes Department towards tax. Despite the same, the petitioner continued to make payment of ₹ 76,57,863/- for the period between 28.05.2009 and 30.07.2009 to the third respondent and further sum of ₹ 60,27,290/- for the period between 28.04.2009 and 22.05.2009 and thereby, denied the legitimate revenue to the Government. The Commercial Taxes Department was not required to issue a fresh notice in Form B-6 as long as there was a further intimation of arrears of tax due from the third respondent to the Commercial Taxes Department. In this case, there was an intimation of arrears by a notice dated 15.04.2009 of the Commercial Taxes Department. It was incumbent on the part of the petitioner to have obtained proper clarification from the Commercial Taxes Department. Instead, the petitioner continued to make payment to the third respondent. There is no merit in the present Writ Petition, as the petitioner has taken a chance to violate Section 26 of the TNGST Act. The petitioner ought to have been cautious while making further payment to the third respondent. The sting under Section 26(4) stared at the petitioner - Petition dismissed.
|