9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (6) TMI 961X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oner is aggrieved by the orders of assessment passed in respect of the assessment years 2013-2014, 2014-2015 and 2015-2016. By consent of the parties, these main writ petitions themselves are taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself. 2. Mr.P.Rajkumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the impugned orders of assessment were passed without considering the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fore finalizing fresh assessment and therefore, he submitted that the Assessing Officer has to re-do the assessment, after hearing the petitioner and considering their objections in detail. 3. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents submitted that the petitioner without deducting TDS under Section 13 of the TNVAT Act, on the charges made for printing, stitching and embroider ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ice of proposal did not contain the proposal for imposition of penalty. However, the fact remains that the Assessing Officer has imposed penalty in respect of those two assessment years. Therefore, it is evident that such imposition of penalty is in violation of principles of natural justice, more particularly, when the petitioner was not even given an opportunity of personal hearing as well befor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o pay 70% of the tax. While passing the impugned orders of assessment, the Assessing Officer has not taken into consideration of the said contention of the petitioner. If an opportunity of personal hearing was given to the petitioner, though they would have been in a position to satisfy the Assessing Officer as to how they are justified in making such contention. In this case, the Assessing Office ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
