9911796707
TMI Blog1998 (3) TMI 658X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ess in hill produce. The said firm was an assessee to sales tax under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act. It is stated that the business of the firm was closed with effect from March 31, 1991 and all the assessments as on that date were completed and the tax due were also paid. It is also stated that the security deposit of Rs. 5,000 was also returned on July 31, 1996. 2.. Petitioners are aggrieved ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... overy notice issued by the second respondent. It is stated that the petitioners filed exhibit P6 petition before the Government and the Government issued exhibit P7 communication granting instalments based on which the petitioners remitted the entire amount and the statement showing the details of payment is produced as exhibit P8. It is stated that the petitioners submitted exhibit P9 petition be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sed, the petitioners had remitted the tax and penal interest due as per the said orders in instalments. Learned counsel also submitted that the petitioners are not liable to pay any penal interest for the period prior to the demand notices issued pursuant to exhibits P3 and P4 orders. Learned counsel in support of the said contention relied on the decision of this Court in Joy Varghese v. State of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ver tax was also pending consideration in various writ petitions. If the returns filed by the petitioners were not acceptable the assessing authority should have completed the assessments and should have raised the demand. Since the petitioners have denied the liability to pay turnover tax in the returns filed by them until and unless an assessment is completed rejecting the return and default is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
