Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
CGST - Acts + GST Rates GST Ntf. GST Forms GST - Manual GST - FAQ State GST Acts SGST Ntf. I. Tax Manual
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Ace Star Properties Pvt Ltd Versus The Commercial Tax Officer The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT)

Levy of tax on TDS - Levy of penalty under Section 27(3) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 - Held that:- For the assessment year 2009-10 with regard to the dispute relating to TDS, the impugned order came to be passed under Sections 27(3) & 27(4) of the TNVAT Act - as against the order passed under Section 27(3) of the TNVAT adjudicating the dispute which is solely on TDS a revision alone will lie. - instead of entertaining the appeal, the 2nd respondent ought to have returned the pape .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nd the consequential levy of penalty under Section 27(3) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, as not maintainable, the petitioner has come forward with this writ petition. 2. It could be seen from the impugned order that during the course of hearing of the said appeal before the appellate authority, the petitioner did not press his appeal regarding penalty levied under Section 27(4) of the TNVAT Act for wrong availment of input tax credit. 3. The case of the petitioner company in brief i .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

2010, the officials of the respondent department inspected the business place of the petitioner and, during such inspection, there were certain defects noticed by the officials. The 1st respondent, based on the audit report and invoking Section 27 of the TNVAT Act, issued pre-revision notice for which the petitioner filed a detailed reply. Not being satisfied with the same, the 1st respondent levied tax on TDS and also levied penalty. Challenging the same, the petitioner preferred an appeal to t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

itioner, the said order was questioned before the appellate authority on making necessary pre-deposit of 25% of disputed tax amount and the appeal was numbered and posted for hearing. Further, according to him, after having heard the appeal, on 29.06.2015, the appellate authority, the 2nd respondent herein rejected the contentions of the petitioner and dismissed the appeal as not maintainable for want of jurisdiction holding that a revision alone will lie as against the order appealed. 7. It is .....

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