Court remits case to respondent for more details on commodity codes. Petitioner to submit objections within two weeks.

The court remitted the case back to the respondent for further details from the petitioner regarding commodity codes. The petitioner was directed to treat the proceedings as show cause notices, submit objections within two weeks supported by proper proof, and the respondent was instructed to re-do assessments after considering the objections and providing a personal hearing opportunity. The writ petitions were disposed of without costs, and related miscellaneous petitions were closed.

---

---

Issues:
Challenging assessment orders under Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 and Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 for multiple years.

Analysis:
The petitioner, a registered dealer, challenged assessment orders for various years, arguing against taxation on hair oil purchases from a specific supplier. The respondent pointed out the taxable nature of hair oil and issued notices based on an audit objection. The petitioner failed to provide evidence of purchasing vegetable oil, leading to finalization of assessments by the respondent.

The petitioner contended that the supplier classified goods as exempted, highlighting an alleged error in the assessment orders. The respondent disputed the authenticity of the supplier's letter submitted by the petitioner. The court acknowledged the seriousness of the matter but decided to remit the case back to the respondent for further details from the petitioner regarding commodity codes.

Rather than setting aside the proceedings, the court directed the petitioner to treat them as show cause notices and submit objections within two weeks, supported by proper proof from manufacturers regarding the nature of products purchased. The respondent was instructed to re-do assessments after considering the objections and providing a personal hearing opportunity. The writ petitions were disposed of without costs, and related miscellaneous petitions were closed.

---