TMI Blog2020 (7) TMI 582X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ell within the period prescribed under Section 25(1). The assessing officer having thus proceeded to determine the tax which had escaped assessment, the challenge against Exhibit P8 assessment order on the premise that it was passed after the five year period stipulated in Section 25(1) cannot be countenanced. There is no reason for this Court to interfere with Exhibit P8 order, particularly since the petitioner has approached this Court without exhausting the statutory remedies - petition dismissed. - WP(C). No. 230500 of 2016(E) - - - Dated:- 13-7-2020 - Mr. Justice V.G. Arun For the Petitioner : Adv. Sri. K. S. Hariharan Nair For the Respondent : Sr. Government Pleader Sri. C. K. Govindan JUDGMENT Petitioner is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the petitioner submitted Exhibit P9 rectification petition under Section 66 of the KVAT Act. But in the meanwhile, revenue recovery proceedings were initiated for recovery of the tax due under Exhibit P8. Hence the writ petition. 3. Heard. 4. The contention urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that Exhibit P8 order is bad, since it was issued after the period prescribed under Section 25(1) of the KVAT Act. It is further contended that the assessment order was issued without affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner, in spite of the 1st respondent being informed about the death of the assessee and a request made to grant time for production of documents. Finally it is contended that Exhibit P3 request ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... per Section 25(1) of the KVAT Act, the assessing authority can, within five years from the last date of the year to which the return relates, proceed to determine, to the best of its judgment the turnover which has escaped assessment to tax or has been underassessed. In the instant case, the petitioner has not disputed the fact that the assessee was issued with Exhibit P4 notice dated 21.11.2011, which was well within the period prescribed under Section 25(1). The assessing officer having thus proceeded to determine the tax which had escaped assessment, the challenge against Exhibit P8 assessment order on the premise that it was passed after the five year period stipulated in Section 25(1) cannot be countenanced. A reading of Exhibit P8 sho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
