9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2019 (5) TMI 907X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment for the subject assessment year was deemed to be completed on 31.10.2014 under Section 22(2) of TNVAT Act. 3.It is the case of the petitioner that pursuant to the inspection of his business premises by the Enforcement Wing Officials on 03.10.2015, the second respondent revised the assessment under Section 27 of the Act and passed the revised assessment order on 31.03.2017 by reversing the input tax credit mistakenly claimed twice and levied interest for the same. 4.It is the case of the petitioner that pursuant to an alleged scrutiny, the second respondent further issued revision of assessment notices dated 11.07.2018 and 31.07.2018 proposing to again revise the assessment on the alleged ground that sale reported by the petitioner di ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... laid down in the JKM.Graphics Solution Pvt. Ltd reported in 99 VST page 343 and also requested for a personal hearing. 7.It is the case of the petitioner that on the same date of reply sent by him, another revision of assessment notice dated 11.10.2018 was received by him calling upon him to come for personal hearing and in that notice, the respondent has stated that the revision of assessments proposals are not based on MIS report and the same is based on scrutiny of the petitioner's monthly returns. The petitioner also sent a reply on 23.10.2018 explaining that once the alleged difference is pursuant to comparing returns filed by selling and purchasing dealer, intra departmental enquiry as per dictum of the Division Bench judgement ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that mere change of opinion is not a ground for revsion of assessment. 13.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner drew the attention of this Court to the reply dated 11.10.2018 wherein the petitioner has categorically stated that there is no suppression of sales and that they have disclosed all the particulars to the respondent while furnishing their monthly returns. They have also stated that proposal to revise assessment to levy additional tax of Rs. 9,528/-, which was subsequently reduced to Rs. 3,024/- by another revision assessment notice is not maintainable in law. 14.It was also made clear in their reply that since tax amount involved was only Rs. 9,528/-, they were prepared to pay the said amount. However, the second resp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to revise the assessment, the petitioner also expressed his willingness to pay the said amount, as seen from his reply dated 20.08.2018. In the reply dated 11.10.2018, the petitioner has given para-wise explanation for non-liability of tax as per the proposed revision of assessment. It was made clear in the reply filed by the petitioner that no fresh set of materials are available with the second respondent for revising the assessments. A detailed explanation was given by the petitioner regarding the discrepancy made by them in their reported sales. 18.It is also the case of the second respondent that new materials are available with them in order to make revision of assessment against the petitioner. All the bills referred in the assessm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
