TMI Blog2024 (2) TMI 1127X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ailed - HELD THAT:- The petitioner has placed on record the reply dated 01.12.2020, which bears the signature of the recepient and is dated 02.12.2020. The said communication refers to three refund orders, specifies the order numbers and the corresponding refund amounts. The communication also records that copies of the refund orders are enclosed with the communication. In these facts and circums ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 (TNVAT Act) was held to be wrongly availed. 2. The petitioner was a registered dealer under the TNVAT Act and had claimed Input Tax Credit (ITC). In respect thereof, the petitioner asserts that two refund orders were issued for the period 01.06.2017 to 30.06.2017 and one refund order and for the period 01.07.2017 to 31.07.2017. 3. The petitioner ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f of the respondents. He submits that the assessing officer cannot be faulted for reversing the credit in view of the admitted position that the refund orders were not uploaded on the portal. He also submits that the communication dated 01.12.2022 does not bear the designation of the officer who received such communication. 6. The operative portion of the impugned order is as under: The ta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ustice warrants that the petitioner be provided an opportunity to place these documents for the consideration of the assessing officer. Solely for that reason, the order impugned herein calls for interference. 8. Hence, the impugned order dated 29.12.2023 is quashed and the matter is remanded for re-consideration. The petitioner shall submit all relevant documents to the assessing officer withi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
