9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (2) TMI 2X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... For the Respondent : Mr. V. Prashanth Kiran Government Advocate ORDER The petitioner is before this Court against the impugned order dated 10.03.2022 passed by the respondent for the Assessment Year 2013-2014. 2. The specific case of the petitioner is that the petitioner was deemed to have been assessed in terms of Section 22(2) of TNVAT Act, 2006 on 31.10.2014. 3. The case of the petitioner ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 489/-. 5. It is submitted that the petitioner has replied to the same on 28.12.2020 and that the petitioner was also heard on 20.10.2021, wherein, it was the objection of the petitioner that the demand cannot be inflated which was however overruled during the personal hearing. Therefore, the petitioner had filed a objection notice on 01.11.2021 by which time, the impugned order dated 10.03.2022 h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be quashed. 8. The learned Government Advocate for the respondent on the other hand would submit that the decision of this Court in the case of M/s.Orient Fans (Proprietor - M/s.Orient Paper and Industries Limited) Vs. The State Tax Officer, as delineated the legal position as far as limitation under Section 27 of the TNVAT Act, 2006. 9. It is submitted that while dealing with an identical provi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rder has not considered the objection of the petitioner as far as defence of the petitioner on merits of the case. It is merely states that the petitioner had filed a reply dated 28.12.2020, in which, they have stated that the present proceedings were barred by limitation and therefore penalty under Section 27(3) of the Act was also justified. 13. A reading of the impugned order indicates that ba ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that issue relating to limitation cannot be agitated against, as the issue now stands covered by the views expressed by this Court in the case of M/s.Orient Fans (Proprietor - M/s.Orient Paper and Industries Limited) Vs. The State Tax Officer and in view of the Division Bench in Appellate Assistant Commi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
