9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 1412X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Sivagnanam, J. For the Petitioner : S. Raveekumar For the Respondent : S. Kanmani Annamalai, AGP ORDER The petitioner is a registered dealer on the file of the respondent under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. In these writ petitions, the petitioner challenged the orders of assessment under the provisions of the State Act for the y ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd copies were sought for with further opportunity to the petitioner to reconcile the allegation of mismatch, in the impugned orders, the respondent stated that the petitioner did not utilize the opportunity of being heard on 8.3.2016 and nor produced any details. Initially, this Court is of the view that the petitioner did not appear. But, there is no denial in the counter affidavit to the averme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... partial confirmation, then it goes without saying that the petitioner had produced certain material or was able to explain to the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer that the allegation of mismatch was not made out. 6. However, the contention of the petitioner is that full particulars were not furnished and that the system failed because of the connectivity problem and other issues. Therefore, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of the same, the respondent shall afford an opportunity of personal hearing, consider the issues pointed out by the petitioner in an effective manner by providing all the details, which were sought for and pass an order in accordance with law, within two weeks thereafter. Till then, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner for r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
