9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2022 (5) TMI 293X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed without passing the assessment orders for the assessment years TIN 2012-2013 to 2015-2016 under the provisions of the TNVAT Act and so without authority of law and also contrary to the provisions of the TNVAT Act, 2006. 2. For the Assessment Years 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2015-16, there was an assessment under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 i.e., TNVAT Act in short. As against those orders, the petitioner approached this Court by filing writ petitions in W.P.Nos.13329 to 13332 of 2018 in the matter of Excel Engineering Enterprises Vs. The Assistant Commissioner (CT), Thirupattur Assessment Circle. 3. The learned Judge of this Court, while disposing those writ petitions by order dated 19.06.2018, has passed the following ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... w cause notices, and accordingly, reply to be given within two weeks time and on receipt of the same, the Assessing Authority shall proceed to consider those objections or reply by giving a personal hearing to the petitioner/ assessee and ultimately pass an order if necessary. 6. In this context, it is the case of the petitioner, as projected by Mr.P.Rajkumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that, in order to comply with the first condition of 15% of the demanded tax that has been paid on 30.07.2018 i.e., within the period stipulated by this Court by order dated 19.06.2018. 7. Insofar as the second compliance viz., treating it as a show cause notice and to give a reply is concerned, it is the further case of the petitioner th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gard to the claim now made by the petitioner that, on 02.08.2018 reply had been given is concerned, that reply had never been received or never been given, as no acknowledgment or no proof to that effect has been filed. Therefore, according to the Revenue counsel, there is no such compliance on the second part of the conditional order. Therefore, it is free on the part of the Revenue to proceed to recover the tax demanded as per earlier orders that is the reason why the present attachment has been made, hence, such order does not warrant any interference from this Court. 12. I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties. 13. Now, the only controversy is, whether on 02.08.2018 as claimed by t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... thout passing any order as per the direction of this Court made earlier. 18. If the said amount of Rs.8,99,352/- is deducted from the total demand, now made it comes out about Rs.42,00,000/- and odd. 19. In order to balance both sides and to meet the ends of justice, this Court feels that out of this Rs.42 lakhs due i.e., tax demand + penalty, if the petitioner comes forward to pay 50% of the amount, an indulgence can be shown by this Court, under which, the matter can been remitted back to the respondent for re-consideration. While reconsidering the same, the 02.08.2018 reply said to have been given by the petitioner can be considered and after giving an opportunity of personal hearing, final orders of assessment can be passed. In that v ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
