2016 (8) TMI 671

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he orders passed by the second respondent, who is the Appellate Authority before whom the petitioner had filed appeals as against the order of assessment dated 10.10.2014 for the assessment year 2007-08. The petitioner did not question the assessment order in its entirety and disputed the turnover only to the extent of Rs. 622,62,547/-. In so far as the turnover relating to a sum of Rs. 1369317498/- and Rs. 1340758140/-, the petitioner had filed writ petitions before this Court in W.P.Nos.28818 and 28819 of 2014 challenging the assessment orders only that extent. 3. The explanation given by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is that with regard to the said turnovers, the petitioner has questioned the orders of assessment on s....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....W.P.Nos.28818 and 28819 of 2014 but had directed the respondents not to take any coercive action against the petitioner and as the impugned order in the writ petitions has not been set aside by the court, the said order would not have any impact on the appeal provision. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that in terms of the provisions of the Acts and the Rules, the admitted liability of an assessee when he avails an appeal remedy would be the liability which he admits in the memorandum of appeal whatever his stand might be before the Assessing Officer. In support of his stand, the learned counsel placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kanpur Vanaspati Stores, Kanpur vs. C....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t on the memorandum of appeal filed before the second respondent in respect of the other turnovers of the same assessment year. 7. When the writ petitions in W.P.Nos.28818 and 28819 of 2014 came up before this Court on 14.11.2014 elaborate submissions were heard and it appears that there were hearings at earlier occasions as well. After hearing Mr.N.Sriprakash, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.Manokaran Sundaram, the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents in the writ petitions, this Court reserved orders. At that juncture, a request was made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that till orders are passed in the writ petitions, the respondents may take action against the pe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ondents are restrained from giving effect to the impugned assessment orders which are the subject matter of challenge. Thus the only interpretation which can be given is that the turnovers to that extent stands suspended. 8. The issue which has been raised by the second respondent in the impugned order is that the petitioner has not remitted 25% of the tax admitted. In fact, an identical issue arose for consideration before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kanpur Vanaspathi Stores (supra). The case was under the Uttar Pradesh State Sales Tax Act and the rules framed thereunder which are para materia with the TNGST Rules as well as the TNVAT Act. In the said case before the Assessing Officer, the assessee admitted its tax liabil....