9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 1656X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r Petitioner: Mr.C.Baktha Siromoni For Respondents : Mr.K. Venkatesh Government Advocate (Taxes) ORDER Heard Mr.C.Baktha Siromoni, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.K.Venkatesh, the learned Government Advocate (Taxes), who accepts notice on behalf of the respondents and with their consent, the Writ Petition is taken up for disposal. 2. The petitioner is a registered deale ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case on hand, the VAT audit is conducted as per the authorization issued by the second respondent/The Joint Commissioner, which is illegal and without jurisdiction. 4. Therefore, it is submitted that when a Statute stipulates that a particular thing is to be done in a particular manner, it shall have to be done in that manner alone. In support of such contention, the learned counsel for the peti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 30098 to 30104 and 32479 of 2016 dated 26.07.2017. In the said case, the identical contention with regard to the jurisdiction of the second respondent was raised and the Court, after taking into consideration two earlier decisions in W.P. Nos.32566 and 32641 to 32645 of 2016 dated 11.01.2017 (M/s. Jeevan Buy N. Save, rep. by its proprietrix Vs. The Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes and Others ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the facts and circumstances of the case warranting Audit, there cannot be any fetter to exercise such a power. Therefore, the circular can at best be held to be recommendatory for the purpose of guidance and cannot have force of law. 6. For all the above reasons, the Writ Petition is allowed and the impugned VAT Audit proceedings dated 16.05.2014 are set aside and consequential revision notice ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
