TMI Blog2021 (7) TMI 116X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... posed revision notice. The objections raised are extracted in page Nos.3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 of the impugned order passed by the respondent No.1. However, the respondent No.1 has again relied upon the judgment of this Court in the case of M/s.Indian Rayon [ 2013 (9) TMI 1021 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ] and submitted that the judgment of this Court squarely applies to the facts and circumstances of the case. The respondent No.1 has not considered any of the objections raised by the appellant. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and without expressing anything on the objections raised by the appellant, it is deemed appropriate to remit the case back to the respondent No.1 to reconsider the case - appeal allowed by way of re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... documents and to show cause as to why the claim for deduction should not be disallowed. In response to the said notice, the assessee-dealer appeared and produced all the relevant documents to rebut the objection taken by the respondent No.3. It is alleged that the respondent No.3 without considering any of the contentions, passed a reassessment order dated 22.11.2017 under Section 39(1) read with Sections 36 and 72(2) of the Act of 2003 for the year 2011-12 creating an additional tax liability with interest and penalty. This reassessment order was primarily based upon the judgment of this Court in the case of Mahadevi Stores vs. Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Zone I and others in STA Nos.506 and 507 of 2011. The assessee-deale ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d failed to establish that the order in question was erroneous and / or that it was prejudicial to the revenue. It is stated that the respondent No.1 without considering any of the contentions raised by the assessee-dealer, passed the impugned order dated 18.07.2019 setting aside the order passed by the respondent No.2 dated 29.10.2018 and restored the reassessment order dated 22.11.2017 passed by the respondent No.3 for the assessment year 2011-12. 4. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order of the respondent No.1, the assessee / appellant has filed this appeal. 5. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that the appellant had raised various contentions regarding the jurisdiction of the respondent No.1 to entertain a proceeding und ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s consideration to the arguments canvassed by the learned counsel for the parties. 8. A perusal of the impugned order passed by the respondent No.1 discloses that the respondent No.1 took note of the written objections submitted by the appellant herein to the proposed revision notice. The objections raised are extracted in page Nos.3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 of the impugned order passed by the respondent No.1. However, the respondent No.1 has again relied upon the judgment of this Court in the case of M/s.Indian Rayon (supra) and submitted that the judgment of this Court squarely applies to the facts and circumstances of the case. The respondent No.1 has not considered any of the objections raised by the appellant. 9. In that view of the mat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
