GST Helpdesk   Subscription   Demo   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (12) TMI 371 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

2015 (12) TMI 371 - MADRAS HIGH COURT - TMI - Determination of the total and taxable turnover - respondent has returned the appeal papers filed by the petitioner on the ground that the appeals were filed based on the revised assessment orders made under Section 84 of the Act - Held that:- Originally, assessment orders were passed for the assessment year in question. Aggrieved over the same, he filed rectification petitions under Section 84 of the Act before the 2nd respondent, in and by which, o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e 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 already remitted 25% of the disputed taxes. - Petition disposed of. - W. P. Nos. 33242 and 33243 of 2015 and M. P. Nos. 1 of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e orders of the 1st respondent made in N.Dis.Nos. 1084, 1085/2015-A1 dated 9.10.2015 and to direct the 1st respondent to admit and dispose the appeals on merits filed by the petitioner. 3.1 The petitioner is a registered dealer under the TNVAT Act, 2006 with TIN No.33921702760. They are also registered under the CST Act and filing monthly returns under the provisions of the Act. According to the petitioner, they are originally an assessee on the files of the Assistant Commissioner (CT), Ponneri .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e 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, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

led based on the revised assessment orders made under Section 84 of the Act. Aggrieved over the same, the petitioner is before this Court. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the 1st respondent has failed to consider that the assessment proceedings passed by the 2nd respondent are under Section 22 of the Act read with Section 9(2) of the CST Act, 1956 and Section 84 of the Act empowers the 2nd respondent to revise the assessments passed under Section 22 of the Act and the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of the Act. That apart according to him, when Section 84 permits the 2nd respondent to rectify 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, app .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

on. Aggrieved over the same, he filed rectification petitions under Section 84 of the Act before the 2nd respondent, in and by which, orders were passed reducing the taxable turnover for the respective years. Since the documents filed by the petitioner in respect of 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 eac .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

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

Go to Mobile Version