TMI Blog2016 (10) TMI 939X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of 2016 & W.P.No.34470 of 2016 - - - Dated:- 29-9-2016 - T. S. Sivagnanam, J. For the Petitioner : Mr.N.SriPrakash For the Respondents : Mr. S. Kanmani Annamalai ORDER Heard Mr.N.SriPrakash, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.S.Kanmani Annamalai, learned Additional Government Pleader (Taxes) appearing for the respondents. Since the issue involved in all these Writ Petitions lies in a very narrow compass, with the consent of the learned counsel appearing on either side, the Writ Petitions are taken up for disposal. 2. The petitioner-Company, is a registered dealer on the file of the respondent under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 [TNVAT Act] and also under the Central Sales ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... could have been sent on him. 4. Prima facie, I am not satisfied with the explanation, but, in any event, since there is a legal issue involved in these Writ Petitions, they are taken up for consideration. 5. In the first set of Writ Petitions, after assessments were completed by orders dated 25.2.2016, the petitioner submitted a letter on 30.05.2016, stating that they are in possession of the Industrial Input Certificate for the relevant transaction and they requested the Assessing Officer to accept the same and revise the orders of assessment. The Assessing Officer opined that after he has passed orders of assessment, he cannot revise the same and advised the petitioner to file Appeals. The correctness of the said Intimation is chall ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Accordingly, the W.P.Nos.34470 to 34473 of 2016 are allowed and the impugned Intimations dated 24.08.2016, are set aside. 8 (i) Now, coming to the other set of four Writ Petitions, which have been filed challenging the orders of assessment, as pointed out earlier, intimation issued for all the four years, is with regard to the rate of tax on sale of Rubber Profile. If the Industrial Input Certificate is produced, then the petitioner is entitled for concessional rate of tax. However, due to non production of the same, the respondent levied tax at 12%. The Intimation given by the Assessing Officer dated 24.08.2016, has been set aside by this Court in W.P.Nos. 34470 to 34473 of 2016, by this Order. Therefore, to that extent, the impugned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
