TMI Blog2019 (6) TMI 1138X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... II (sales details of assessee's sellers). While it is the case of the writ petitioner that first of the SCNs dated 30.11.2016 was not served on the writ petitioner, it is fairly submitted by writ petitioner's counsel that second SCN dated 01.10.2018 was served on the writ petitioner, but it was served as part of a batch pertaining to certain writ petitions which are pending and hence, the writ petitioner could not respond to the second SCN. This explanation is hardly acceptable. This Court is remitting the matter back to the second respondent on the sole ground of not adhering to M/S. JKM GRAPHICS SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER [ 2017 (3) TMI 536 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] . The impugned order is set ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ess of the writ petitioner was audited by the Enforcement Wing and certain defects were pointed out. Defects pointed out fall under two categories. Though both pertain to reversal of 'Input Tax Credit' ('ITC' for brevity), first reversal of ITC is based on difference in purchase turnover i.e., between balance sheet and monthly returns and second reversal of ITC is based on mismatch i.e., comparison of Annexure -I (purchase details of assessee) and Annexure II (sales details of assessee's sellers). 7. In this regard, there is no dispute or disagreement before this Court that two 'show-cause notices' ('SCNs' for brevity) were issued to the writ petitioner and they are dated 30.11.2016 and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h the other end dealer is also registered within his jurisdiction. Thus, when the Assessing Officer has data to show that the dealers registered with him, whose returns have been accepted when compared to the other end dealer does not match, then the Assessing Officer is first required to enquire with the Assessing Officer of the other end dealer to make verifications as to whether the mismatch could have occurred due to any one of the factors, which may not be due to the deliberate default of the dealer, satisfy himself that and after such verification, it prima facie appears that the returns to be revised, at that stage, the Assessing Officer would be entitled to issue a show cause notice containing full particulars and clearly stating as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... echanism, which can go into these aspect and furnish details in full form to the respective Assessing Officers, who can decide for themselves as to whether there is a case made out to call upon their dealer to explain. If this centralized mechanism is not put in place exclusively for such purpose, it would result in notices and orders being issued by the respective Assessing Officers without even the knowledge of the Assessing Officer of the other end dealer resultantly no action being taken against other end dealer, assuming, he is at fault. Therefore, it is high time the Department wakes up and stops the one way approach and examine the matter in a holistic manner so that the defaulting dealer is brought to books.' 9. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
