TMI Blog2015 (8) TMI 300X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e 3rd respective notices dated 24.04.2015. It is also an admitted position that the petitioner, after receipt of all these notices, appeared before the respondent on 13.02.2015 in person along with original invoices. When that be the case, it is not known why the petitioner has not gone before the respondent with a written reply. When the petitioner appeared before the respondent, in all fairness, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it petitions are filed by M/s Shri Kuppayanna Swamy Agency, represented by its Partner, challenging the impugned proceedings issued by the Commercial Tax Officer, Santhyamangalam, in TIN Nos. 33362983080/2011-12 to 2013-14 respectively dated 18.05.2015. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned orders are not sustainable on the ground that the Circular No.7/2014 (BB1/358 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the copies of invoices were also produced by the petitioner before the respondent. But, all of a sudden, the impugned orders have been passed, contrary to the Circular No.7/2014 (BB1/3589/2014) dated 03.02.2014 issued by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, which clarifies that no order of revision should be made without affording an opportunity to the dealer as provided under Sections 22, 25 an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3.02.2015 in person along with original invoices. When that be the case, it is not known why the petitioner has not gone before the respondent with a written reply. When the petitioner appeared before the respondent, in all fairness, he should have submitted his replies. 6. In view of the above, when the petitioner has received three notices on 09.10.2014, 12.01.2015 and 24.04.2015 for all the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
