2017 (10) TMI 1

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....by the State. 2. Briefly stated, the case is that, a proprietorship, the appellant in W.A. No.1459 of 2017, obtained registration under the KVAT Act in October, 2013 to commence business in gold jewellery. In December, 2013, by Exts.P1 and P1(a) in W.P.(C) No.24958 of 2015, they acquired certain quantity of gold. However, in the return concerning the month of December, 2013, the stock was not declared. Subsequently, the registration itself was got cancelled on the application of the assessee with effect from 31.03.2014. Thereafter, by its letter dated 16.05.2014 to the Assessing Officer, the assessee declared the discrepancy in his return for December, 2013 caused on account of his omission to declare the stock of gold. However, without pe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ent under appeal, the learned single Judge allowed W.P.(C) No.24958 of 2015 and quashed the impugned proceedings and directed that the assessee be permitted to revise his return and on that basis to complete the assessment. 5. Insofar as W.P.(C) No.33522 of 2016 is concerned, the learned single Judge upheld Ext.P6 order of assessment, but interfered with the penalty order by reducing the same to Rs. 1 lakh. 6. In W.A. Nos.1454 and 1485 of 2017, the State is challenging the judgment of the learned single Judge while in W.A. No.1459 of 2017, the assessee is challenging the judgment of the learned single Judge in W.P.(C) No.33522 of 2016 to the extent assessment order has been upheld by the learned single Judge. 7. We heard the learned Gove....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ssessing Officer of the discrepancy caused on account of his omission to include the stock of gold in the return for the month of December, 2013. When such a request was made, as rightly found by the learned single Judge, the Assessing Officer ought to have given him an opportunity. True, the request was made long after 31.03.2014 when the registration was got cancelled by the assessee. But, however, as stated by the learned single Judge, even in such a case, revision of assessment pertaining to the period of which the assessee was carrying on the business on the strength of the registration granted to him, was permissible in law and it was therefore, the learned single Judge has taken the view. 11. Coming to the complaint of the learned G....