2016 (1) TMI 1218

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....etition dated 06.03.2014. The petitioner is also challenging the consequential demand notice issued by the respondents which is at Annexure 2 to the memo of this writ petition. The said demand notice is dated 06.03.2014. Rest of the prayers are not pressed at this stage in this writ petition, nonetheless, liberty may be reserved with the petitioner to challenge any order of reassessment passed by the respondents in accordance with law. Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the respondents have not appreciated the further documents which were supplied by the petitioner assessee, which are at Annexure 8 series to the rejoinder/reply filed on behalf of the petitioner to the counter affidavit filed on 25th June, 2015 by the respondent n....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tted by the counsel for the petitioner that book of accounts has not been rejected at all by the respondents. All the details of manufacturing have been stated in the book of accounts which have not been properly appreciated by the respondents while passing the order at Annexure 1 and, hence, the order at Annexure 1 and the consequential order at Annexure 2 as well as the order passed by the appellate authority which is dated 30th September, 2014, deserve to be quashed and set aside. 2.  Counsel for the respondents was called upon to bring the notice if at all it is given to the petitioner before the order of assessment at Annexure 1 is passed for enhancement in the gross turnover. Counsel for the respondents State is unable to poin....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....urnover. The amount enhanced in the gross turnover is at Rs. 1,05,36,86,782/. For such huge enhancement, had a notice been given by the respondents to the petitioner assessee, they would have pointed out the documents which are at Annexure 8 series to the rejoinder affidavit filed by the petitioner dated 1st September, 2015. Looking to these documents, it appears that, (a) There is already a reference about additional production for the assessment year 2010-11 of 266158 metric tonne of coal valued at Rs. 5,60,623/. (b) This book of accounts has never been rejected by the respondents. (c) Assessing Officer has not drawn his attention upon these documents and the correct production mentioned in the documents. ....