9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (1) TMI 64X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent beyond the period of five years from the date of original assessment and therefore, under Section 16(1)(a) of the Tamilnadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 r/w Section 9 of Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, the revision of assessment made by the respondent under the impugned revision of assessment order, is barred by the Law of Limitation. 3. A counter-affidavit has been filed by the respondent wherein it has been stated that exemption was given to the petitioner as stock transfer to a tune of Rs. 12,69,190/-. According to him, with regard to the claim, the petitioner earlier filed 'F' Form bearing No.CT-108153 dated 30.03.2006 and according to the respondent, on a scrutiny of 'F' Form, it was noticed that the petitioner had cla ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... titioner by the respondent only on 09.04.2018 as reflected in Reference No.2 in the impugned revision of assessment order ie., beyond the period of five years from the date of the original assessment order. Section 16(1)(a) of the Tamilnadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 reads as follows: "Section 16.Assessment of escaped turnover:-(1)(a) Where, for any reason, the whole or any part of the turnover of business of a dealer has escaped assessment to tax, the assessing authority may, subject to the provisions of subsection (2), at any time within a period of five years from the date of order of the final assessment by the assessing authority, determine to the best of its judgment the turnover which has escaped assessment and assess the tax paya ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t case. 11. Admittedly, the revision of assessment proceedings initiated by the respondent against the petitioner is barred by the Law of Limitation as per Section 16(1)(a) of the Tamilnadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959. Therefore, the contention of the respondent that the petitioner will have to file a statutory appeal and the writ petition is not maintainable is rejected by this Court. 12. As observed earlier, as seen from the counter-affidavit filed by the respondent, the respondent has not given any answer with regard to the plea of limitation raised by the petitioner in this writ petition. Therefore, it can be inferred that in view of the materials available on record before this Court that the revision of assessment proceedings init ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
