TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 371X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... certain aspects have not been considered by the 2nd respondent, the petitioner filed appeals before the 1st respondent under Section 51 of the Act read with Section 9(2) of the CST Act, 1956, remitting 25% of the disputed tax for each of the assessment years. The 1st respondent, while returning the appeal papers by the impugned orders, has stated that the appeals are not maintainable, since revision will only lie as against the orders under Section 84 of the Act. - petitioner is permitted to file revision petitions under Section 54 of the TNVAT Act, along with stay applications, as against the orders passed under Section 84 of the TNVAT Act - there shall not be any recovery proceedings against the petitioner, since the petitioner had alread ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... transfer to own branch situate in other State. The petitioner is also doing high sea sales under bond transfer. For the assessment years in question, the petitioner reported their total and taxable turnover under the CST Act, however, the 2nd respondent by proceedings dated 31.03.2015, determined the total and taxable turnover. Subsequently, the petitioner filed declarations and requested the 2nd respondent to revise the assessments so made under Section 84 of the Act, which were considered by the 2nd respondent, who re-determined the same, by proceedings dated 08.06.2015. Thereafter, pursuant to the rectification of defects by the petitioner, the 2nd respondent re-determined the total and taxable turnover by proceedings dated 31.07.2015. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... an error apparent on the face of the record and after rectification, the demand raised in the orders passed under Section 22 of the Act got reduced, the same would amount to existence of the orders passed under Section 22 of the Act. Hence, the impugned orders returning the appeals filed against such orders are not sustainable in law. 5. On the other hand, the learned Additional Government Pleader, appearing for the respondents would submit that since Section 54 of the TNVAT Act provides for revision against the order passed under Section 84 of the Act, the 1st respondent has rightly returned the appeal papers to the petitioner and hence he prayed for dismissal of the writ petitions. 6. I have considered the submissions made by the l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... opy of this order and on such filing, without raising any issue with regard to limitation, the revisional authority shall entertain the same and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law on the stay applications, within a period of two weeks thereafter. The revision petitions shall also be taken up for hearing and the same are directed to be disposed of,, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks thereafter, after affording due opportunity to the petitioner. It is made clear that pending consideration of the stay applications by the revisional authority, there shall not be any recovery proceedings against the petitioner, since the petitioner had already remitted 25% of the disputed taxes. The w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
