TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2008 (2) TMI 822
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tioner filed all the quarterly returns and that the books of account and other documents were examined on June 28, 2007 by the assessing officer, respondent No. 1. He completed the assessment. At the time of hearing of the assessment case, the petitioner's claim of stock transfer of Rs. 7,48,85,240 to its branch office in Nagaland was allowed after examination of all documents including declaration form F issued by its branch office in Nagaland. Pursuant to the said assessment order, an additional demand of Rs. 22,423 was raised and the petitioner paid that amount. Now suddenly a notice of review of the said assessment order has been issued to the petitioner under memo No. 4223 dated January 31, 2008 in form 55 with a proposal to disall....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mil Nadu v. Amburose Mary [1991] 83 STC 483 (Mad) originally the Tribunal held that the addition to the taxable turnover and also the imposition of penalty equal to the tax on the suppressed turnover was rightly confirmed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. Subsequently, a review petition was filed by the respondent-assessee under section 36(6) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959. In review, the Tribunal set aside the imposition of penalty while upholding the addition made to the turnover on account of suppression. The honourable Madras High Court observed that "the power of review is not an inherent power, rather it is a statutory power, and section 36(6) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, provides that a part....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Rs. 7,48,85, 240 and in support of the claim the petitioner produced Central declaration form F issued by its branch office. The claim was allowed at the time of assessment. But subsequently, a verification report from the Additional Commissioner of Tax, Nagaland, Dimapur was received which stated that since October 4, 2001, no form F or C was issued to Ravi Timber and Allied Products Pvt. Ltd., Tizit, Mond Distt., Nagaland. The learned senior in view of above fact has argued that the petitioner falsely stated that its branch office obtained form F from the appropriate authority of Nagaland as per law and issued the same to the petitioner. The learned senior has argued that false representation that forms F were received by the branch of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ction 83. (2) Any authority referred to in sub-rule (1) who considers it necessary to review, on his own motion, an assessment made or order passed by him earlier, he shall serve upon a dealer, casual trader or person a notice in form 55 directing him to appear and show-cause on the date, time and at the place specified in such notice as to why the assessment or order referred to in such notice shall not be revised upon review by him: . . . (4) After hearing the dealer, casual trader or person, as the case may be, and considering the accounts, documents or evidences which the reviewing authority has in his possession or which may be produced before him by such dealer, causal trader or person, such reviewing authority shall, by an o....