TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 2119X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was passed by the Additional Commissioner on 07.02.2017 for re-opening the assessment which was probably not been served upon the petitioner. In any case, when the petitioner had this information, he gave a detail reply on 27.02.2017 explaining as to why the reassessment being initiated is not proper etc., and stressed that he was liable to be assessed at the rate of 4.5% as the equipment which i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of 2017 - - - Dated:- 25-7-2018 - Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. Mr. Surendra Kumar Posti, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Yogesh Pandey, Additional CSC, for the State/respondent nos.1 to 3. ORDER Hon ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral) The petitioner before this Court was registered as a trader in the State of Uttarakhand under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 and the Uttarakhand V ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the rate of 4.5% . Returns were filed by the petitioner and the petitioner was assessed by the respondent authorities at the rate of 4.5%. Thereafter, the matter was opened for re-assessment by the Department by giving a notice to the petitioner on 24.02.2016 under Section 29(4) of the Value Added Tax, 2005, for which permission was sought from the Additional Commissioner. In pursuant to the said ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... actured by the petitioner is a necessary component of telecommunication equipment, for which duty of 4.5% and not of 13.5% has to be given, which is in any case aresiduary clause. 5. It appears that the reply given by the petitioner assigning reasons as to why the reassessment is not proper and it is merely a change of opinion has not been considered by the revenue authorities. 6. In view of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
