TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 1663X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . B. Raveendran For The Respondent : Mr. V. Hari Babu Additional Government Pleader(Taxes) ORDER The order dated 20. 05. 2013 issued by the respondent in CST. No. 501300/2011-12 is under challenge in this writ petition. 2. The learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the writ petitioner made a submission that the original assessment made by the respondent is in complete violation of the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006(hereinafter referred to as TNVAT ACT ). As per Section 9(2-A) of the CST Act, 1956 read with proviso to Section 22(2) of the TNVAT ACT , a dealer shall be deemed to have been assessed to tax as per his returns if assessment order are not passed on the returns submitted for the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ision cited supra the impugned order now passed in the proceedings dated 20. 05. 2013 cannot be enforced at all. The learned Senior counsel relied on the Judgment delivered by this Court in W. P. Nos. 4080 4081 of 2018 dated 07. 06. 2018. The similar issue has been discussed and this Court has come to the conclusion that the statutory time limit prescribed cannot be extended by the respondent. However, it is made clear that in the event of identifying any inconsistencies or discrepancies in the returns, then the action shall be taken by exercising the powers conferred under Section 27 of the TNVAT Act . 6. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent relying on the common counter affidavit filed by the respondent, has sta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eturn and the amount of tax paid is incorrect or for certain other reasons, the returns cannot be processed, then the only remedy is to reopen the assessment and, the impugned proceedings cannot be given effect to. 7. So far as the assessment year 2008-09 is concerned, the mistake committed by the respondent is to issue a notice for provisional assessment. This could not have been done by the respondent, in the light of the above reasons. 8. In the result, these writ petitions are disposed of giving liberty to the respondent to initiate reopening proceedings, if she deems fit and appropriate to do so and the respondent is directed not to enforce the order dated 01. 02. 2018 and the notice dated 01. 02. 2018 for the assessment ye ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
