2016 (10) TMI 782

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... one Mr.K.Srikanth the present proprietor of the petitioner herein. The proprietorship concern is a LPG distributor of M/s.Indian Oil Corporation Limited, which has also been registered on the file of the respondent Department under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). 3. Due to advanced age and illness of the father of the present proprietor of the petitioner, the proprietorship concern was converted into a partnership firm and the present proprietor of the petitioner namely Mr.P.Srikanth was inducted as a partner with effect from 1.4.2008 and the firm was registered on the file of the Registrar of Firms, Kancheepuram. The change in the constitution of the dealer was intimated to....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....oprietor. The present proprietor of the petitioner pleaded ignorance of the procedural formalities of intimating the Department of every change in the nature and constitution of the dealer. He pointed out that the monthly returns were duly filed and necessary taxes paid without default even after the demise of the original proprietor. He further pointed out that he appeared before the respondent and offered to surrender the old tax payer identification number and requested for issuance of a new tax payer identification number. 7. Thereafter, another notice was issued by the respondent dated 29.4.2015 for the assessment year 2013-14 stating that such a request is not entertainable. Ultimately, the respondent passed the order of assessment d....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... affidavit and relied upon Rule 5(4)(b) of the said Rules stating that there is a duty cast upon the dealer to inform the change in constitution and admittedly, the present proprietor of the petitioner has failed to intimate the Department. Furthermore, in terms of Rule 5(2) and (3), the certificate of registration is not transferable and there is a 30 days' time limit stipulated under the Rule to furnish the details of the change to the Registering Authority. Therefore, the learned Government Advocate submitted that the impugned orders are perfectly justified. 11. After hearing the parties elaborately and perusing the materials placed on record, this Court is of the view that the mistake committed by the dealer can be treated only as ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ice, which is a distributor for M/s.Indian Oil Corporation Limited. The transactions done by the dealer cannot be doubted, as the LPG is supplied as a part of public distribution system. Therefore, the returns submitted by the petitioner could not have been disbelieved. In addition to that, the dealer has been filing returns regularly, which have been accepted by the Department. Therefore, for a mere irregularity, penalizing the dealer by denying the claim of entire input tax credit is an arbitrary exercise of power. 15. As non furnishing of information, as required under Rule 5(3) of the said Rules, does not contemplate a situation to disbelieve all transactions especially transactions as done in the present case, the impugned orders reve....