Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s. Bombay E-Store India Private Limited Versus The Assistant Commissioner (CT) , The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, The Joint Commissioner (CT)

2017 (10) TMI 544 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

Cancellation of registration - TNVAT Act - opportunity of being heard - Held that: - the revisional authority accepts the fact that the registering authority did not afford an opportunity for personal hearing to the petitioner when Sections 39(14) and 39(15) of TNVAT Act, 2006, mandates that an opportunity of personal hearing should be granted to the dealer before cancellation. Therefore, the revisional authority fell in error in holding that since the petitioner themselves filed an application .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tion cancellation order dated 13.04.2017 calls for interference. - Petition allowed - decided in favor of petitioner. - WP.No.21156 of 2017, W.M.P.Nos.22030 and 22031 of 2017 - Dated:- 6-9-2017 - T. S. Sivagnanam, J. For the Petitioner : Mr. V. Sundareswaran For the Respondents : Mr. K. Venkatesh ORDER Heard Mr.V.Sundareswaran, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.K.Venkatesh, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents. 2. With the consent of the learned counsel on either .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

f registration. 4. The undisputed fact is that the petitioner made an application for cancellation of their registration under the provisions of TNVAT Act, 2006. Only after the application was presented, the petitioner realised that they had submitted a wrong TIN number of the firm which was carrying on business, whose registration they wanted to cancel and inadvertently, they had mentioned the TIN number of the petitioner, which is a going concern. On realising the mistake, the petitioner submi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ner's application for cancellation has been acknowledged and the petitioner was intimated that their place of business will be verified on 03.03.2017 at 17.00 hours and the petitioner was requested to be present in the premises and furnish all the original documents required for causing verification. In the mean time, for the month of January 2017, the petitioner filed their e-returns on 23.03.2017. However, subsequently, the petitioner was asked to receive the e-mail dated 13.04.2017 that t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

017. 5. Firstly, the revisional authority accepts the fact that the registering authority did not afford an opportunity for personal hearing to the petitioner when Sections 39(14) and 39(15) of TNVAT Act, 2006, mandates that an opportunity of personal hearing should be granted to the dealer before cancellation. Therefore, the revisional authority fell in error in holding that since the petitioner themselves filed an application for cancellation, the failure to afford an opportunity for personal .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| 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