2017 (10) TMI 544

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 : Mr. V. Sundareswaran For the Respondents : Mr. K. Venkatesh ORDER Heard Mr.V.Sundareswaran, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.K.Venkatesh, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents. 2. With the consent of the learned counsel on either side, the writ petition itself is taken up for disposal. 3. The petitioner was a registered dealer on....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....IN number of the petitioner, which is a going concern. On realising the mistake, the petitioner submitted a representation to the first respondent on 09.02.2017 stating that while trying to cancel the TIN for another company, they had wrongly filed the application for cancellation of the TIN of the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner requested to cancel their request for cancellation. The applic....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....2017. On receipt of the cancellation order, the petitioner immediately approached assessing authority with a representation dated 09.06.2017 to restore their registration. Since no action was taken by the assessing authority, the petitioner filed revision petition before the second respondent on 12.06.2017. This revision petition has been dismissed by the revisional authority by order dated 11.07.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rity noted that though verification notice dated 02.03.2017 was issued fixing the date of personal inspection on 03.03.2017, the same, though was not done, cannot vitiate the cancellation order, because it is the petitioner's voluntary application. This reasoning given is erroneous, since registering authority was bound to verify the place of business, as per the verification notice dated 02.0....