2016 (1) TMI 280

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ovt. Pleader ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Joseph Prabakar learned Additional Government Pleader (Taxes), who took notice for the respondent and with their consent, the main writ petition is taken up for disposal. 2. The petitioner company is a baker involved in the manufacture of both taxable and exempted bakery products and in addition to the manufacture of b....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....fferential ITC amount at Rs. 4,65,554/-. Therefore, the petitioner filed a detailed objections in their letter dated 26.09.2015 highlighting the difference in the amount of ITC, the exempted and total turnover adopted in the formula for the computation of reversal of ITC. Despite this, the respondent in its impugned proceedings dated 5.10.2015, by adopting Rs. 3,95,272/- as the actual amount of IT....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the petitioner is before this Court. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned order contains errors apparent on the face of record and the same has been passed in gross violation of principles of natural justice without conducting an enquiry as contemplated under section 27(2) of the Tamilnadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006. He further submitted that if the respondent had c....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s apparent on the face of the record, the petitioner moved an application under Section 84 of the TNVAT Act for the assessment years in question and the said petition was rejected without opportunity. Further, in the impugned order dated 5.10.2015, no suppression of assessable turnover has been established. No enquiry as contemplated under section 27 of the TNVAT Act was conducted for imposing pen....