2016 (11) TMI 809

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.....V.Sundareswaran For Respondents : Mr. K. Venkatesh ORDER Heard Mr.V.Sundareswaran, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.K.Venkatesh, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents. With the consent of the learned counsel appearing on either side, the Writ Petition itself is taken up for disposal. 2.The petitioner is a registered dealer in hides and skins unde....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sed to reverse the Input Tax Credit of Rs. 16,26,753/-, shown as excess when compared to the stock shown in Annexure V to the return for the month of April 2014. The first respondent also proposed to levy penalty under section 27(2) of the VAT Act. The petitioner was granted fifteen days time to submit their objections. The petitioner by representation dated 08.02.2016, requested one month time to....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... making such an observation, the first respondent called upon the petitioner to reconcile the facts and figures with full facts, within ten days. On receipt of the said notice, the petitioner submitted a representation on 13.4.2016, wherein among other things, they stated that their Auditor requires one month time to produce all the records and explain the transaction to the first respondent. As a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rst respondent to have issued a notice to the petitioner to appear in person along with the records and clarify all the issues. If that had been done, the present Writ Petition itself could have been avoided. At this juncture, this Court would point out that the orders of assessment are not to be passed for statistical purpose but to ensure that the correct rate of tax and the correct quantum of t....