2018 (1) TMI 866

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Sales Tax Act, 1959 (in short TNGST Act ) and also an assessee in the books of the respondent. The avocation of the appellant is manufacturing of plastic granules and for that purpose, he purchases plastic waste from the registered dealers within the State of Tamil Nadu and convert them to granules. 4. The appellant / writ petitioner would further state that the documents relating to the accounts and the accounts maintained in the Central Processing Unit (C.P.U.) of the computer, except monitor, were seized by the Central Excise Department on 12.01.2001 for certain verification and till date of filing of the writ petition, the said C.P.U. have not been returned and so also the documents, and as a consequence, they are handicapped for the r....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....file an objection for the proposal for which also the appellant /writ petitioner has submitted his reply on 28.10.2005 stating among other things that there is no tax liabilities since the purchase of plastic waste was from the registered dealers. The respondent once again sent a notice dated 28.02.2006 calling for objections for modified proposals. The appellant / writ petitioner has also again filed his reply on 20.04.2006. However, after a gap of nearly three years, the respondent has issued a notice, dated 20.02.2009, with the proposed reassessment of the tax as detailed below: Taxable turnover proposed     Rs. 3,16,15,139.00 @ 4% Exemption allowed     Rs. 73,07,133.00 Total turnover proposed  &nbsp....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....me to the passed on 16.03.2009, which is beyond the period of five years and as such the impugned order is liable to be quashed. In the alternative, it is also the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant, in the light of the circular No.7/2014, BB1/3589/2014, dated 03.02.2004, before passing the revision order, the dealer should be given a reasonable opportunity and personal hearing, if required, under Section 22(4) of the TNGST Act and admittedly, the personal hearing was not given to the appellant / writ petitioner and therefore, he prays for interference. 9. Per contra, the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondent would contend that as per Section 16(1)(a) of the TNGST Act, within a period of five year....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....aid fact, Section 16(1)(a) of the TNGST Act would not come to the aid of the appellant / writ petitioner. 12. No doubt the appellant / writ petitioner is having an effective alternative remedy under Section 31 of the TNGST Act within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of the assessment and as per the second proviso to Section 31, for the purpose of preferring an appeal, there must be satisfactory proof of the payment of the tax admitted by the appellant to be due or of such instalments thereof as might have payable, as the case may be and 25% of the difference of the tax assessed by the assessing authority and the tax admitted by the appellant. 13. Attention of this Court was drawn to the order, dated 29.09.2006, made in W.A.(MD....