TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
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>Assessment Orders Remanded for Separate Review; Refunds Ordered for Overpayments Post Final Decision.</h1> The HC set aside the impugned notice and Assessment Orders, remanding the cases to the respondent for separate common orders per assessment year. The ... Challenge to impugned notice and Assessment Orders - input tax credit availed by the petitioner under Section 19 of the TNVAT Act - HELD THAT:- This Court is inclined set aside the impugned orders and remit the cases back to the respondent to pass separate common orders for each of the Assessment Years along with the Applications filed by the petitioner on 07.01.2023 under Section 84 of the TNVAT Act, 2006. To the extent the orders of the Appellate Commissioner for the Assessment Years 2006-2007, 2007-2008, 2008-2009 and 2014-2015 have been accepted and the demand may be dropped and to the extent the demands have been confirmed by the respondent, the demand may be confirmed for the petitioner to pursue the remedy before the Appellate Authority. Petition disposed off. Issues:Challenge to impugned notice dated 17.12.2015 and Assessment Orders for multiple years, dispute regarding input tax credit availed under TNVAT Act, pending Section 84 Petition for rectification of orders, consideration of past judgments on similar issues, appeals before Appellate Authority and Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, confirmation and remand of input tax credit denial, tax liability attachment, and refund directive.The judgment addresses multiple issues, including challenges to an impugned notice and Assessment Orders for various years. The petitioner contested the input tax credit availed under the TNVAT Act for several heads, such as furnace oil, ineligible refusal for capital goods, non-production of original invoices, and more. The petitioner filed a Section 84 Petition for rectification of the orders, which is pending. Similar issues were previously considered by the Court for other assessment years, resulting in remand orders. The petitioner appealed to the Appellate Authority and Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, where some denials were confirmed, and some cases were remanded.The Court noted that a substantial portion of the demand confirmed in the impugned orders was in favor of the petitioner by the Appellate Authority. Consequently, the Court decided to set aside the impugned orders and remit the cases back to the respondent for separate common orders for each assessment year. The orders of the Appellate Commissioner for certain years were accepted, and the demand may be dropped accordingly. For confirmed demands, the petitioner can pursue remedies before the Appellate Authority. The respondent was directed to follow the reasoning of the Commercial Tax Officer and the Appellate Authority and pass favorable orders on pending issues before the Appellate Tribunal.Regarding the tax liability of Rs. 45,65,894/-, the Court directed the respondents to appropriate the amount towards part of the petitioner's tax liability and refund any balance if the demand is dropped post remand proceedings. Consequently, W.P.(MD)No.23369 of 2015 was disposed of, and W.P.(MD)Nos.10163 to 10166 of 2018 were allowed with specific observations. No costs were awarded, and connected Miscellaneous Petitions were closed as a result of the judgment.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
