Contact us   Feedback   Annual Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (11) TMI 496 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

2016 (11) TMI 496 - MADRAS HIGH COURT - TMI - Validity of order of assessment dated 11.7.2016 - TNVAT Act, 2006 - violation of principles of natural justice - Held that: - The respondent seeks to take umbrage under the notice issued by the first respondent dated 22.8.2016 and to state that the petitioner was given opportunity. Unfortunately, the second respondent failed to note that the impugned order of assessment is dated 11.7.2016 and therefore, the notice issued by the first respondent dated .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d his duties as an Assessing Officer. - Revision of assessment u/s 84 of the TNVAT Act - Held that: - the AO has to be well aware of the fact that under the provisions of law, he is exercising his jurisdiction, when admittedly he has not passed the order of assessment and there is no Petition u/s 84 of the TNVAT ACT, filed by the dealer or there is no exercise of suo motu power by the second respondent, reference to section 84 of the Act is wholly unsustainable. - Writ Petition allowed - .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

K. Venkatesh ORDER Heard Mr.S.Raveekumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.K.Venkatesh, learned Government Advocate appearing for respondents and with the consent of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the Writ Petition is taken up for disposal. 2. The petitioner is a manufacturer and trader of refined oil and registered on the file of the second respondent under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 [TNVAT Act]. The order impugned in this Writ Petition is an o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

aid order dated 21.7.2015, was never issued to the petitioner or received by the petitioner. The first respondent had issued a notice dated 22.8.2016, which was dispatched belatedly and received by the petitioner on 6.9.2016. In the said notice issued by the first respondent, which is also for the very same assessment order, the petitioner has been granted fifteen days time to submit their objections, however, even before that second respondent has passed the impugned order dated 11.7.2016, rece .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ortunately, the second respondent failed to note that the impugned order of assessment is dated 11.7.2016 and therefore, the notice issued by the first respondent dated 22.8.2016, could have no bearing on the impugned assessment. That apart, even assuming that notice was issued by the first respondent on 22.8.2016, the same was received by the petitioner only on 6.9.2016. However, even prior to that the impugned order of assessment has been passed on 11.7.2016, despatched belatedly and received .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| 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