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 Assessment Reassessed: Petitioner to Submit Evidence in 2 Weeks, Respondent to Reevaluate with Hearing Opportunity.</h1> <h3>Shadowfax Technologies Private Limited, Represented by its Director Mr. Vaibhav Khandelwal Versus Assistant Commissioner (ST), Chennai</h3> Shadowfax Technologies Private Limited, Represented by its Director Mr. Vaibhav Khandelwal Versus Assistant Commissioner (ST), Chennai - TMI Issues:Challenging an impugned order based on lack of documentary evidence supporting contentions in a tax assessment.Analysis:The petitioner challenged an impugned order dated 31.08.2024, arguing that the respondent proceeded to confirm the proposal without considering the documentary evidence filed in support of the petitioner's contentions. The discrepancies found in the petitioner's Books of Accounts included differences in turnover reporting, credit note turnovers, tax payments, ITC claims, and other financial details. The Assistant Commissioner issued a Show Cause Notice to the petitioner, who responded with detailed objections and supporting documents. The petitioner communicated with the tax authority via email, providing additional time and sharing necessary data due to size limitations for uploading on the GST portal. However, the respondent passed the impugned order without considering the documentary evidence provided by the petitioner, leading to allegations of non-application of mind to the material on record.The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the impugned proceedings lacked proper consideration of the documentary evidence submitted, which rendered the assessment order flawed. In response, the learned Additional Government Pleader representing the respondent agreed to re-do the assessment, acknowledging the voluminous nature of the documents. Both parties consented to furnishing hard copies of the documents for review. Consequently, the High Court set aside the impugned order and directed the petitioner to treat it as a Show Cause Notice, requiring them to submit their reply and supporting documents within two weeks. The respondent was instructed to consider the petitioner's submissions and pass appropriate orders after providing a reasonable opportunity for a hearing. Failure to submit the required documents within the stipulated time would result in the restoration of the impugned assessment order.In conclusion, the High Court disposed of the writ petition with the aforementioned directions, emphasizing the importance of considering documentary evidence in tax assessments and providing both parties with an opportunity to present their case effectively. No costs were awarded, and connected miscellaneous petitions were closed accordingly.
TaxTMI 