TMI Blog2016 (7) TMI 369X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t:- it is clear that the respondent is well aware of the fact that Form W has been filed by the petitioner within the time frame. If that be the case, the observations contained in both the impugned orders are wholly erroneous. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed, the impugned orders are set aside and the matter is remitted back to the respondent to consider Form W, which has been filed b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .2015. 3. The short issue, which falls for consideration, is as to whether the petitioner had filed Form W within the time prescribed under the Act. The specific case of the petitioner is that they filed Form W by way of e-filing and it is well within the time limit prescribed under Rule 11 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Rules, 2007. The petitioner has produced acknowledgments, which were ge ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t. This petition has been rejected by the order dated 16.3.2015 by referring to Section 18(3) of the said Act and stating that Form W was not filed by the petitioner within the time prescribed nor have they produced any proof of having done so. 6. The learned Additional Government Pleader elaborately referred to the factual position and based on the written instructions given by the respondent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d Form W claim are filed by e-filing, there is no merit in accepting Form I monthly returns filed and disputing the filing of Form W for refund. The reply given by the respondent to the said averment in their para wise comments is as follows : 'It is true that the petitioner filed Form W through online within the time frame and obtained acknowledgment therefor and this fact has not been de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
