9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 1538X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Venkatesh ORDER Heard Mr.P.Sivaraman, the learned counsel for M/s.R.V.Chitra Associates, the learned counsel for the petitioner, and Mr.K.Venkatesh, the learned Government Advocate for the respondent. 2. The petitioner has challenged the assessment order issued by the respondent, under the provisions of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, for the year 1999-2000, dated 30.06.2004. 3. The only grou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... On 03.06.2004, the petitioner submitted a representation/letter to the respondent, stating that, they have received the revised pre-assessment notice, and that, they have been granted only 10 days time for filing objections, since their Zonal Office has been shifted to Gurgaon (Haryana), all the documents are available in the said Office, and therefore, requested for further four weeks' time ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oner has submitted replies, dated 27.02.2004, 03.03.2004 and 29.03.2004. It is only thereafter, the respondent issued the revised pre-assessment notice, dated 25.05.2004. In such circumstances, bona fide of the petitioner cannot be doubted, and the respondent/Assessing Officer ought to have granted reasonable time to the petitioner, especially, when the matter has been pending from February, 2004, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t of the petitioner was false. These observations are made in this order, to hold that the letter, dated 03.06.2004, has been received in the Office of the respondent on 11.06.2004, because, there is no records produced by the respondent before this Court to prove that the person, who signed in the Letter Delivery Book was not employee in the Office of the respondent, or not a person authorized to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
