2016 (11) TMI 213

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....o file a counter, by consent, the writ petitions are taken up for joint disposal. 2. The brief facts, which are necessary for the disposal of these writ petitions, are that the petitioner leased out engine text beds, which are permanently embedded to earth and is collecting and remitting service tax before the fourth respondent Department under the heading 'Renting of Immovable Property Service' The petitioner is a registered dealer on the file of the second respondent under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 (hereinafter called the TNVAT Act) and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (hereinafter called the CST Act) and registered before the Service Tax Commissionerate under the control of the fourth respondent. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....mercial Taxes (Enforcement), Coimbatore. 5. After about four months, the impugned notices have been issued by the second respondent stating that he has received certain proposals and defects were noticed. This statement is found in the sub-column of the impugned notices. After referring to the inspection of the officials of the Enforcement Wing, the notices proposing to levy tax on lease rent of machinery, proposing to reverse the input tax credit without C-Forms, demanding short levy of tax on machinery sales, proposing to reverse the input tax credit on account of mismatch, proposing to reverse the input tax credit alleging that the petitioner has purchased from registration certificate cancelled dealers and demanding tax not collected o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e to be set aside. 10. One more ground, on which, the impugned show cause notices are to be held as bad in law is that the notices are bereft of particulars and in the sub-column, it is stated as 'proposal received'. Obviously, this proposal is from the officials of the Enforcement Wing. If such is the case, then the petitioner is entitled to known as to why the officials of the Enforcement Wing sent a proposal, though the petitioner had given an elaborate reply to the officials of the Enforcement Wing on 8.2.2016 as undertaken by them in their statement recorded by the officials of the Enforcement Wing on 31.12.2015. 11. Thus, if the proposals of the Enforcement Wing Officials are to be accepted as such and based on the report of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....osition to effectively submit their objections. 13. Even assuming that the petitioner should be directed to submit their objections to the impugned notices, all that the officials of the Enforcement Wing do is to reiterate what the petitioner stated in their reply to the Commercial Tax Officer (Enforcement), Group III, Coimbatore dated 8.2.2016 and that is of no use because the Assessing Officer, who is bound over by the proposals of the Enforcement Wing Officials, is expected to act independently. This Court can take judicial note of the fact that in several cases, though the Assessing Officers are convinced that the proposals of the Enforcement Wing Officials, are not tenable, yet because of the hierarchy of the Authorities and the power....