TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tax Authority Must Address Rectification Application by Year-End, Interim Stay Granted on Recovery Proceedings</h1> <h3>SYA Homes, Rep by its Partner, Mr. Raghavan Mohan Versus Assistant Commissioner (ST) (FAC), State Tax Officer</h3> HC examined a tax dispute involving procedural challenges to an assessment order and recovery notice. The court directed the tax authority to address the ... Service of SCN not made - no reply to SCN - contention of the petitioner is that the petitioner had not received any show cause notice and hence, they are not in a position to file their reply - HELD THAT:- In the present case, it appears that the show cause notice was issued to the petitioner and the petitioner had received the same. Thereafter, the assessment order was passed on 17.07.2023. However, the petitioner is not in agreement with the same, since there was an error in the said assessment order. Hence, the petitioner had filed a rectification application through online on 17.08.2023 and physically on 29.08.2023. Though this writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned order dated 17.07.2023, it will be sufficient to meet out the case of the petitioner if the rectification application of the petitioner is disposed of by the respondent - this Court directs the respondents to dispose of the rectification application filed by the petitioner dated 17.08.2023 and 29.08.2023 on or before 31.12.2023. Petition disposed off. Issues involved: Challenge to impugned order and recovery notice, non-receipt of show cause notice, error in assessment order, non-consideration of rectification application.Challenge to impugned order and recovery notice: The writ petition challenged the order dated 17.07.2023 passed by the first respondent and the recovery notice dated 25.10.2023 issued by the second respondent. The petitioner contended that they had not received the show cause notice, but the respondent argued that since the notice was uploaded, it was deemed to be served.Non-receipt of show cause notice: The petitioner claimed they had not received the show cause notice issued on 31.05.2023, making it impossible for them to file a reply. However, the respondent maintained that the notice was served as it was uploaded.Error in assessment order: The petitioner alleged an error in the assessment order passed on 17.07.2023 and filed a rectification application online on 07.08.2023 and physically on 29.08.2023. The Department did not consider the application promptly, leading to further dispute.Non-consideration of rectification application: The petitioner's rectification application was received by the Department on 01.09.2023, despite being submitted earlier. The respondent assured that the application would be addressed promptly.Judgment: The Court noted that the show cause notice was received by the petitioner, who then filed a rectification application due to disagreement with the assessment order. The Court directed the respondent to dispose of the rectification application by 31.12.2023 and ordered an interim stay on recovery proceedings against the petitioner until then. The writ petition was disposed of without costs, and connected miscellaneous petitions were closed accordingly.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
