2018 (2) TMI 1603

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....it has been filed and the counsels have made their submissions. 3.The petitioner has impugned the notices issued by the respondents dated 12.03.2015 for the assessment years 2002-2003 to 2009-2010, 2012-2013 to 2014-2015 (except 2010-2011 and 2011-2012). The first respondent, who is holding the post of Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, suo motu exercised his revisional power and inspected the place of business of the petitioner from 12.01.2015 to 20.01.2015. In the said inspection, a statement was recorded from the Managing Director of the petitioner with regard to the findings /discrepancies during the course of inspection. 4.It is stated that the Inspecting Officer more than Rs. 1 crore was collected as tax. Pursuant thereto, the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ct by exercising power under the TNVAT Act. 6.Further more, it is submitted that when the Superior Officer namely, first respondent having called for an explanation from the petitioner as regards the findings on inspection, no useful purpose would be served the second respondent, their Assessing Officer, with regard to the jurisdiction of the authority to reopen assessment completed under the TNGST Act. Though it has been specifically raised by the petitioner in the representation, in the counter affidavit there is a vague denial stating that the notices issued are in accordance with section   88 (1) of the TNVAT Act. 7.It is pointed out by the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner that the said provision Section 88(1) would....