2017 (2) TMI 1022

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....se matters had come up for hearing before this Court on 02.01.2017. On that date, Mr.Kanmani Annamalai had appeared for the respondent and sought time to obtain instructions in these matters. 2. Today, Mr.K.Venkatesh, appears on behalf of the respondent. The learned counsel says that he will argue the matter based on the record placed before this Court by the petitioner and therefore, with the co....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....010 1,19,210/- 3 2010-2011 21,041/- 6. Counsel for the petitioner says that the impugned orders are flawed on account of two reasons. First, mismatch in the information as available on the Department Website and that which is contained in the petitioner's returns cannot form the basis of reversal of input tax credit. In support of this submission reliance is placed by the petitioner on th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....issioner (CT) Valluvarkottam Assessment Circle, 50VST 179 (MAS). As regards the levy of penalty is concerned, Mr.Venkatesh, concedes that unless the petitioner's case falls within the provision of Section 27A of the 2006 Act, no penalty can be levied under Section 27(3) of the very same Act. 8. It is in these circumstances, Mr.Venkatesh submits that, if, this Court were to direct the responde....