https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=407481 The court held that the writ petition challenging the tax demand under the TNVAT Act for the year 2015-16 was maintainable despite the petitioner not exhausting the appeal remedy. The court found that the stock difference was calculated using an impermissible formula method due to the absence of a stock register. Relying on precedent, the court quashed the order, directing a physical verification of stock difference based on the petitioner's account books. The assessing officer was instructed to refrain from using formula methods and to rely on physical verification. The petitioner was required to cooperate in providing accurate stock information for verification. en-us Tue, 16 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 11 May 2021 12:11:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=407481 The court held that the writ petition challenging the tax demand under the TNVAT Act for the year 2015-16 was maintainable despite the petitioner not exhausting the appeal remedy. The court found that the stock difference was calculated using an impermissible formula method due to the absence of a stock register. Relying on precedent, the court quashed the order, directing a physical verification of stock difference based on the petitioner's account books. The assessing officer was instructed to refrain from using formula methods and to rely on physical verification. The petitioner was required to cooperate in providing accurate stock information for verification. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Tue, 16 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=407481