2018 (7) TMI 1427

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ted company engaged in the business of manufacturing of pharmaceutical drugs and medicines. An inspection was conducted in the place of business of the petitioner between 13.4.2016 and 23.4.2016, based on which, a statement was recorded on 26.4.2016 from the authorized representative of the petitioner. Pursuant to that, the respondent issued revision notices dated 12.9.2016 for the assessment years from 2011-12 to 2014-15. 3. The entire proposal to revise the turnover for the relevant assessment years was on account of the details culled out from the official website of the Department namely Annexure II of the selling dealers. The further allegation was that those transactions were not reflected in the returns filed by the petitioner and....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ces dated 18.5.2018 for the assessment years from 2011-12 to 2014-15, the respondent admitted that he had sent a deviation proposal to his superior officer. However, it was rejected. The reasons for such rejection having not been disclosed, the respondent stated that he is proceeding to issue the impugned notices dated 18.5.2018 for the assessment years from 2011-12 to 2014-15. 7. Time and again, this Court has always stressed the point that the Assessing Officer is an independent authority and he cannot be directed to complete the assessment in a particular manner. Thus, if a superior officer directs the Assessing Officer to complete the assessment in the manner he proposes, then the purpose of creating an Assessing Officer and a proced....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... be done. 10. In the instant case, the respondent disregarded the direction issued in the said decision, which, admittedly, holds the field as on date, since no appeal is filed, though a review application has been filed by the Revenue. Thus, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that the impugned notices dated 18.5.2018 for the assessment years from 2011-12 to 2014-15 and the impugned notice dated 17.5.2018 for the assessment year 2015-16 cannot be allowed to proceed. 11. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that all the records are available with the petitioner and had a proper consideration been given to their objections dated 16.10.2017, the question of issuing the third set of no....