TMI Blog2019 (3) TMI 406X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sing the impugned demand - the matter is remanded back to the second respondent for fresh consideration and the second respondent after affording sufficient opportunity to the petitioner including the right of personal hearing, pass fresh orders on merits - petition allowed by way of remand. - W.P.(MD)No.11355 of 2015 And M.P(MD) No.1 of 2015 - - - Dated:- 13-2-2019 - Mr. Justice Abdul Quddhose For the Petitioner : Mr.S.Mujibur Rahman For the Respondents : Mr.D.Muruganatham, Additional Government Pleader ORDER The instant writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 13.05.2015 passed in TIN 33455942840/2013-14 and the notice dated 09.06.2015 passed in TIN 33455942840/2013-14. 2.The case of the petitioner ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mandatory as per circular, dated 03.02.2014 issued by the Principal Secretary/Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Chepauk, Chennai-5. He referred the relevant portion of the circular, which is extracted hereunder:- 3.In the light of the above, the following circular instructions are issued which must be scrupulously followed by assessing officers while passing assessment orders. Joint Commissioners/ Deputy commissioners should verity at random the assessment orders passed by the Assessing Officer while taking up cursory inspection and ensure compliance with these basic procedures while passing orders. a) Passing of orders: Fifteen days time limit shall be given as reasonable opportunity to dealers before passing any order and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rocedure including the right of personal hearing, the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court had quashed the assessment orders as well as the notices of demand. 6.In the light of the above submissions, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner prayed that the impugned demand must be quashed. 7.Per contra, the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents would submit that the Assessing Officer issued pre-assessment notice under Section 22(4) of the TNVAT Act 2006 to the petitioner, which was received by the petitioner on 14.10.2014. Despite the receipt of notice, there was no response from the petitioner. Since there was no response from the petitioner, the Assessing Officer passed the impugned order dat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o the pre-assessment notice and therefore, sufficient opportunity has been afforded to the petitioner. But, it is the case of the petitioner that he commenced the business in April 2013 and closed down his business within two months in June 2013 due to business loss and no such notice was received by him. As seen from the impugned demand, it is claimed by the second respondent that the petitioner did not pay huge amount of tax for the purchase of goods. The source for value of the goods was obtained by the second respondent only from their own website and not from the petitioner, either through his website or from any other documents, like invoice, etc., received from him or from any independent source. 10.Considering all the facts and a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
