9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (4) TMI 429X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... years. Petitioner claims that he is not liable to register himself as a dealer under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Tax on Luxuries in Hotels and Lodging Houses Act 1981 (Tamil Nadu Act VI of 1981). It appears that the respondent department caused an inspection on 26.5.2010 and gathered relevant materials from all the service apartments in respect of each one of the writ petitioners and based on that inspection, notice was issued on 16.3.2011 demanding tax on the rent collected and also on the food and beverage supplied under the provisions of TNVAT Act, 2006. The notice inter alia proposed to levy of penalty under Section 16 of the Tamil Nadu Tax on Luxuries in Hotels and Lodging Houses Act 1981 (Tamil Nadu Act VI of 1981). The petition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ou are only guess and not a real turnover which is not based on any records. You have also not handed the case as per Act wise TNLTH ACT and TNVAT Act you have mingled and issued notice. This is not correct in the eyes of law. This is only a hasty conclusion. The Turnover proposed to be assessed under VAT Act is below the limit. We therefore request you to make arrangement for the cross examination of the Enforcement Wing Officers before your presence. The date for such cross examination may be intimated to us well in advance. This reply to the notice has been acknowledged. However, final order came to be passed in each one of the cases determining the tax due under the Act VI of 1981. Besides penalty has also been imposed under Section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment Wing Department as a measure to comply with the principles of natural justice and such hearing will be in terms of Section 6(5) of the Act. Since the proceedings initiated by the respondent department entails a demand for tax and for imposing penalty, the mandatory provision of giving an opportunity of personal hearing should have been followed and that having not been complied with by the respondent the proceeding is bad. The order is challenged on that short ground as above. 4. Considering the nature of issue involved, by consent, all the writ petitions are taken up together for disposal. 5. Learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent in all the cases pleaded that since the objections were filed, there was no requireme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urnishing documents and for cross examination so as to comply with the principles of natural justice and the said plea has been extracted above. Therefore, the requirement of hearing becomes necessary as a specific request was made for cross examination. In such view of the matter it is incumbent on the respondent department to have granted opportunity of personal hearing before deciding the issue on merits. The decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Andhra Cements Case as above, does not apply to the facts of the present case as in that case the question was whether a personal hearing is mandatory in a case of refusal to grant prospecting licence. It was clearly held in that case that no citizen has vested right for grant of prospect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
