9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (9) TMI 1897X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Mr. S. Karunakar For The Petitions : Mr. R. Murugan, Additional Government Pleader COMMON ORDER These writ petitions have been filed by the petitioner challenging the revised assessment orders dated 28. 03. 2018 passed by the respondent for the assessment years 2007-2008, 2008-2009, 2009-2010 and 2010-2011. . 2. When these matters came up for hearing today, the learned counsel appearing for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... submission, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner relied upon an unreported decision of a learned Single Judge of this Court in Thiru. S. Philip Vs. The Commercial Tax Officer, (W. P. (MD). No. 9500 of 2015), dated 01. 04. 2015, wherein this Court has held in paragraph Nos. 3 to 4 as follows: According to the petitioner, the revision order was passed on 25. 02. 2015, beyond 5 years a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssment Circle, Chennai reported in (2014) 68 VST 386 (Mad), wherein this Court has held as follows: allowing the appeal, that under Section 16(1) as it stood prior to amendment where the whole or any part of the turnover of business of a dealer had escaped assessment of tax, the assessing officer had power to revise the assessment at any time within a period of five years from the expiry of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oncerned as contended by the respondent. ? 4. The above decision is squarely applicable to the facts and circumstances of this case, as in this case also the revision proceedings have been belatedly initiated only on 24. 11. 2017 ie. , beyond the period of five years and therefore, all the impugned orders are liable to be set aside as barred by limitation. 5. In the result, these writ petition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
