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 →

M/s Viom Networks Ltd. Versus The Asst. Commissioner (CT) (FAC) And Others

2016 (4) TMI 1103 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

Validity of impugned order - Violation of principles of natural justice - No opportunity of personal hearing provided before passing the order - Held that:- the petitioner was not given an opportunity of personal hearing by the 2nd respondent, which is violative of principles of natural justice, the impugned orders dated 27.01.2016 passed by the 2nd respondent are liable to be set aside and accordingly the same are set aside. The matters are remitted back to the 2nd respondent for fresh consider .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

o 10543 & 11236 to 11239 of 2016, W.M.P.No.9243 to 9249 & 9753 to 9756 of 2016 - Dated:- 4-4-2016 - M. Duraiswamy, J. For the Appellant : Mr. Raghavan Ramabadran For the Respondent : Mr. S Kanmani Annamalai, AGP ORDER W.P.Nos.11236 to 11239 of 2016 are filed by the petitioner to issue writs of certiorari to call for the records relating to the Impugned Orders in A.P.Nos.389 to 392/2014 respectively dated 27.1.2016 passed by the 2nd respondent and to quash the same. 2. W.P.Nos.10540 to 10543 of 2 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

egistered under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 (TNVAT Act) and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (CST Act). The petitioner bought goods inter-state against Form-C for this purpose and the same was used in the construction, erection and installation process. Further, according to the petitioner, there is no transfer of property by the petitioner to the contractor. On the other hand, there involves transfer of property in the execution of Works Contract by the contractor to 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

7(3) of TNVAT Act for the assessment years 2007-2008 to 2010-2011. The petitioner has sent detailed replies on 03.10.2013. The 1st respondent passed orders on 21.l0.2013 stating that the petitioner has not filed any objection. Aggrieved over the same, the petitioner filed appeals before the 2nd respondent against the orders passed by the 1st respondent, by paying 25% of the tax demand for each of the assessment years towards mandatory pre-deposit. The stay petitions filed by the petitioner were .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ersonal bond for the balance 50% tax demand and the entire amount of penalty for each of the assessment years. According to the petitioner, they have complied with the conditions imposed by this Court in the above said writ petitions. Subsequently, the 2nd respondent took up the appeals filed by the petitioner for final disposal and dismissed the same by orders dated 27.01.2016. Subsequently, a demand notice dated 11.03.2016 was issued by the 1st respondent. Aggrieved over the same, the petition .....

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