TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (11) TMI 809
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 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 under the provisions of Tamil Nadu Value Added ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....,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 submit necessary details. The said represent....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dent 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 agreed to, the petitioner submitted another re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....etitioner 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 tax is recovered from the dealer. By passing the....