9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 1455X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pondent calling upon him to remit a sum of Rs. 18,92,075/- as arrears of interest and penalty. According to him, there are no pending arrears of Sales Tax or Entry Tax and as such, the demand is contrary to law. 3.The petitioner had approached this Court earlier in W.P.No.20078 of 2018, seeking a Writ of Mandamus, directing this very respondent to lift the attachment upon property situated in Union Ward No.9, Old Ward No.17, new present ward 22 of Krishnagiri Municipal Limits in Krishnagiri Bangalore Main Road of Krishnagiri Town. After hearing the parties, this Court passed an order on 03.08.2018 to the following effect: '3.The petitioner made a representation to the first respondent to lift the attachment, as the entire arrears of sale ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, the attachment of the petitioner's personal property shall be lifted within a 'period of two weeks therefrom. No costs.' 4.It is in response to the petitioner's representation dated 27.06.2018 that impugned order dated 25.10.2018 has been passed, quantifying the demand allegedly payable by the petitioner at Rs. 18,92,075/-. 5. Mr.M.Hariharan, learned Additional Government Pleader has filed a counter denying the averments of the petitioner to the effect that there are no pending arrears. He contends that there are pending arrears pursuant to an Entry Tax assessment made on the petitioner in relation to the assessment year 1995-1996, wherein the tax component was determined at Rs. 3,42,061/-, int ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt was duly represented at the hearing before the Committee and their contentions have also been taken into account, while passing order dated 27.04.2011. Having accepted the conclusion of the aforesaid committee, it does not now lie in the mouth of the department to state that the Special Committee could not have considered a matter falling within the compass of the Entry Tax Act. The fact that the petitioner has remitted the tax component also does not advance the case of the respondent. 8. In the facts of this case, as noticed above, particularly for the reason that the Entry Tax assessment relating to the period 1995-96, dated 31.12.1997 has been set aside and no other demand admittedly exists, the petitioners' stand is accepted. The i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
