TMI Blog2016 (7) TMI 284X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ate non-availing of the opportunity granted to the petitioner. The petitioner had sufficient time to submit their objections to the pre-revision notice, dated 23.02.2015 and the impugned order was passed only after two months and the impugned order was challenged by the petitioner only in September 2015. In the light of the above, this Court is not inclined to exercise its jurisdiction, to inte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Manokara Sundaram, learned Additional Government Pleader, appearing for the respondent. By consent of the learned counsel for both sides, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 2. The petitioner, which is a registered dealer, on the file of the respondent, under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax, 2006, has challenged the order of assessment passed by the respon ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ealer on the file of the respondent, failed to respond to the Revision Notice, dated 23.02.2015. The petitioner did not file their objections and therefore, the respondent was well within his jurisdiction to proceed with the assessment on the ground that the petitioner has No Objection to state anything as against the revision notice. It is not as if the petitioner is a small time trader, but it i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a case of deliberate non-availing of the opportunity granted to the petitioner. The petitioner had sufficient time to submit their objections to the pre-revision notice, dated 23.02.2015 and the impugned order was passed only after two months and the impugned order was challenged by the petitioner only in September 2015. 7. In the light of the above, this Court is not inclined to exercise its j ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
