2014 (12) TMI 1243

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... March 2012, dated  August 11, 2014 at annexure A and also for a direction to the respondent-  authorities to verify the correctness of the tax invoices issued by the selling dealers as referred to in the proposition notice dated August 11, 2014 at annexure A by passing necessary reassessment orders and thereafter, to continue the reassessment proceedings, if the tax invoices issued by the selling dealers are found to be false or bogus, after affording reasonable opportunity to cross-examine the selling dealers. 3. The petitioner is said to be a registered dealer under the Act and during August, 2014 the second respondent issued a notice under section 39(1) of the Act for which, the petitioner filed a reply. The second respondent .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... chases as per section 10(4) of the Act by producing the  tax invoice issued by the selling dealer to which petitioner is entitled. 5. The petitioner has also purchased the materials from M/s. R. K. Industries who is also a registered dealer having a valid and current TIN number  and also from G. N. Industries and M/s. Devi Industries who are also registered dealers having a valid and current TIN numbers and claimed input- tax credit by producing valid tax invoices issued by the selling dealers.  According to the petitioner, the respondent-authorities have issued notice  under section 39(1) of the Act proposing to disallow the input-tax credit on  the ground that the petitioner has claimed input-tax credit by produc .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rnment Advocate is that for having found some discrepancies, the notice has been issued under  section 39(1) of the Act. In the event, the petitioner furnishes all the documents that could be looked into and the matter could be closed and subsequently, demand would be raised depending upon the correctness of the documents produced by the petitioner. However, the stand of the counsel  for the petitioner is that it is not only the purchase of goods but, they have  collected the tax at their level which could have been taken note by the  Department where they have collected the tax and the same has been  remitted to the Government or that could have been taken for reassessment, if there is any suppression or misreprese .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X