Failure to reply to statutory notice justified assessment penalty and rejection of the jurisdiction challenge.

Failure to reply to the statutory notice within the prescribed time justified the assessing authority in completing the assessment and imposing the statutory penalty. The challenge based on want of jurisdiction and the alleged effect of non-filing of Form-WW was rejected, as the petitioner admitted that no reply was filed within time. The reference to interest in the order was treated as a typographical error, and the levy was sustained as a penalty under the applicable provision. The writ petitions were therefore held unsustainable and the penalty upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessment orders levying penalty for failure to file Form-WW and for not replying to the statutory notice within time were liable to be interfered with.

Analysis: The petitioner admitted that it did not file a reply to the notices within the stipulated time. On that footing, the authority was justified in proceeding to pass the final orders. The Court also noted that the levy proposed was under Section 63A(2) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 and treated the reference to interest in the order as a typographical error. The challenge based on want of jurisdiction and on the alleged effect of non-filing of Form-WW was rejected.

Conclusion: The writ petitions were not sustainable and the penalty of Rs. 10,000 under Section 63A(2) was upheld.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the dealer fails to reply to the notice within the prescribed time, the assessing authority may proceed to complete the assessment and levy the statutory penalty under Section 63A(2) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006.

---