Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Tvl. Sreevasta Tube Corporation Versus The Assistant Commissioner (CT) and Others

2016 (1) TMI 283 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

Reversal of ITC for non production of declaration forms and non issuance of notice before imposing tax under other category - Held that:- Admittedly, challenging the assessment order for the year 2011-12, the petitioner preferred an appeal and the same was returned for rectifying certain mistakes and for production of proof for payment of 25% of disputed tax. Accordingly, the petitioner, complying those defects, re-submitted the papers, but, till date, the appeal has not been taken up for consid .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

22-9-2015 - For The Respondents : Mr.S.Manoharan Sundaram, AGP(T) ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader (Taxes) who took notice for the respondents and with their consent, the main writ petition itself is taken up for disposal. 2. This writ petition has been filed challenging the order of the respondent in TIN/ 33900060270/2011 -12/A3 dated 10.08.15. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner, being a dealer .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

15. Since the 1st respondent has not calculated the correct rate of tax, the petitioner approached the officer to correct the turnover and tax adjustments and payments. However, in the meantime, the 1st respondent issued order of bank attachment under Section 45 of the Act, without serving the copy to the petitioner for the arrears of tax in pursuance to the order dated 30.04.2015, though mentioning the proceedings dated 19.05.2015. Later on, according to the learned counsel for 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

t also released the bank attachment through his notice dated 17.07.2015. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that when the petitioner approached the 1st respondent by stating that no notice was issued before passing the revision order, the petitioner was advised that if aggrieved, the petitioner can file an appeal. Accordingly, aggrieved over the said order, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the 2nd respondent along with a stay petition with a delay of 16 days. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

esentation through his counsel on 09.09.2015 and requested the 2nd respondent to list the case. Till date, there is no response. In the meantime, the 1st respondent issued bank attachment notice, without serving copy to the petitioner. That apart, according to him, when the petitioner represented before the 1st respondent about the attachment through letter dated 15.09.2015, the xerox copy of the bank attachment order dated 10.08.2015 was served on 18.09.2015. and in the impugned attachment orde .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| 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