9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (1) TMI 1218X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is also challenging the consequential demand notice issued by the respondents which is at Annexure 2 to the memo of this writ petition. The said demand notice is dated 06.03.2014. Rest of the prayers are not pressed at this stage in this writ petition, nonetheless, liberty may be reserved with the petitioner to challenge any order of reassessment passed by the respondents in accordance with law. Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the respondents have not appreciated the further documents which were supplied by the petitioner assessee, which are at Annexure 8 series to the rejoinder/reply filed on behalf of the petitioner to the counter affidavit filed on 25th June, 2015 by the respondent no.4. This rejoinder affidavit filed by t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat book of accounts has not been rejected at all by the respondents. All the details of manufacturing have been stated in the book of accounts which have not been properly appreciated by the respondents while passing the order at Annexure 1 and, hence, the order at Annexure 1 and the consequential order at Annexure 2 as well as the order passed by the appellate authority which is dated 30th September, 2014, deserve to be quashed and set aside. 2. Counsel for the respondents was called upon to bring the notice if at all it is given to the petitioner before the order of assessment at Annexure 1 is passed for enhancement in the gross turnover. Counsel for the respondents State is unable to point out the said notice given to the petitio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1,05,36,86,782/. For such huge enhancement, had a notice been given by the respondents to the petitioner assessee, they would have pointed out the documents which are at Annexure 8 series to the rejoinder affidavit filed by the petitioner dated 1st September, 2015. Looking to these documents, it appears that, (a) There is already a reference about additional production for the assessment year 2010-11 of 266158 metric tonne of coal valued at Rs. 5,60,623/. (b) This book of accounts has never been rejected by the respondents. (c) Assessing Officer has not drawn his attention upon these documents and the correct production mentioned in the documents. (iii) It appears that there is a typographical error in the document which is at Anne ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
