TMI Blog2021 (1) TMI 63X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e wise details for unreported purchases which the second respondent claims that the petitioner had suppressed - As seen from the assessment orders dated 16.11.2020, no explanation has been given by the second respondent as to why they are unable to provide the bill and date wise details for the alleged un -reported purchases made by the petitioner from the Spices Board, Cochin. The second respondent has mechanically accepted the audit report of the Accountant General and has come to the conclusion that there is suppression of purchases made from the Spices Board, Cochin, by the petitioner. When the petitioner has categorically denied any suppression of purchases, the second respondent ought to have furnished details of the alleged purcha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... avathi Devi, learned Special Government Pleader for the respondents in all these Writ Petitions. 4 . The petitioner has challenged the impugned assessment orders passed under Section 27(2) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, on the ground that principles of natural justice has been violated by the second respondent, while passing the impugned assessment orders. According to him, there was no independent assessment made by the second respondent and mechanically, the second respondent has accepted the audit report of the Accountant General, without giving sufficient opportunity to the petitioner. 5 . It is also the case of the petitioner that by his reply dated 23.03.2020, he has categorically stated that all the purchases ef ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ailable to the petitioner is to file the statutory appeal under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 and therefore, the present Writ Petitions are not maintainable. 8. This Court has perused the documents filed along with these Writ Petitions and after hearing the rival submissions, notices the following:- The petitioner on receipt of the notice issued under Section 27 (2) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, has sent a reply on 23.03.2020, wherein, they have requested the respondents to provide the bill and date wise details for unreported purchases which the second respondent claims that the petitioner had suppressed. 9. As seen from the assessment orders dated 16.11.2020, no explanation has been given by the seco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the audit report without any independent assessment and without affording sufficient opportunity to the petitioner to place their objections in the revision of assessment proceedings under Section 27 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006. 14 . For the foregoing reasons, this Court is of the considered view that principles of natural justice has been violated while passing the impugned assessment orders against the petitioner. In the result, the impugned assessment orders dated 16.11.2020 are hereby quashed and the same is remanded back to the second respondent for fresh consideration and the second respondent shall pass final orders on merits and in accordance with law after giving adequate opportunity to the petitioner to place a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
