2017 (3) TMI 1558

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... For the Petitioner : Mrs.Aparna Nandakumar For the Respondent: Mr. S.Kanmani Annamalai Additional Government Pleader (Tax) O R D E R Mr.S.Kanmani Annamalai, learned Additional Government Pleader (Tax), takes notice on behalf of the respondent. By consent of the parties, the main writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself. 2. The petitioner is agg....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of Andhra Pradesh and thus, there is no sale or purchase involved within the State of Tamil Nadu. It is the further contention of the petitioner that they need not pay any tax to the VAT authorities in the State of Tamil Nadu, as their liability, if at all, if any, would arise only within the State of Andhra Pradesh. Therefore, it is contended by the petitioner that the detention of the goods by ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nd therefore the sale by the un-registered dealer by State of Tamil Nadu to the registered dealer at State of Andhra Pradesh has to necessarily be treated as local sales of inter-state sales. However, he fairly submitted that the reply given by the petitioner on 25.03.2017 seems to have been not considered by the respondent, as there is no discussion of such objections in the order impugned in thi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....to how the respondent has passed the impugned order on 25.03.2017 itself i.e. two days before the expiry of the notice time. 8. On considering the above facts and circumstances, I am of the view that there appears to be a non-application of mind, on the part of the respondent in passing the impugned order. Absolutely there is no consideration of the objections raised by the petitioner dated 25.....