Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M. Sahul Hameed Versus The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer

2015 (9) TMI 526 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

Violation of Principle of natural Justice Non Supply of Invoices Incorrect and Incomplete exemption claim Second respondent issued notice, alleging that exemption claimed by petitioner was incorrect and incomplete, thereafter passed impugned assessment order, confirming proposal in notice It was alleged that respondent did not furnish copies of documents sought for by petitioner and without giving any opportunity of personal hearing to petitioner, impugned order was passed violating prin .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

cannot be denied to petitioner and on that score alone, impugned assessment order warrants interference Impugned proceedings of respondent quashed Respondent directed to furnish copies to petition Decided in favour of Assesse. - W.P(MD)No.10064 of 2015, M.P(MD)No.1 of 2015 - Dated:- 9-7-2015 - R. Mahadevan, J. For the Appellant : Mr B Rooban For the Respondent : Mr R Karthikeyan, Additional Govt. Pleader ORDER This writ petition is filed seeking a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call fo .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

a total and taxable turnover of ₹ 11,49,835/- and 6,77,685/- respectively and also paid the tax dues to the Department along with the monthly returns. While so, the second respondent issued a notice dated 03.12.2014, alleging that the exemption claimed by the petitioner is incorrect and incomplete. According to the petitioner, he was not furnished with any particulars in connection with the said notice and also filed an adjournment letter dated 22.12.2014 seeking one month time to file his .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

T Act, 2006 and also proposed to levy penalty under Section 22(5) of the TNVAT Act, 2006. He further submitted that the second respondent while assessing the returns filed by the petitioner afresh, did not furnish the copies of the documents sought for by the petitioner and without giving any opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner, the impugned assessment order has been passed by the second respondent, which caused great prejudice to the petitioner. He, therefore, prayed for quashing .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ed by the petitioner. He further submitted that despite the receipt of the pre-revision notice, the petitioner failed to submit his reply with necessary documents in support of his claim and hence, he is not entitled to seek an opportunity of hearing under Section 22(4) of the TNVAT Act and therefore, the impugned order passed by the second respondent is tenable in law. 6. I have considered the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. 7. At the outset, this Court finds th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version