2018 (9) TMI 548

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....racts. The works contract are being done by the petitioner with the aid of offset printing machines, cutting machines and scoring machines, etc. The petitioner has been carrying out two types of contract and in one type of contract, the petitioner is carrying out all the jobs ie., purchasing raw materials, printing works, etc. This type of works contract is liable for tax under Section 3-B of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as "TNGST Act"). In another type of contract, the petitioner is carrying out only printing job based on the raw materials supplied by the customer. This type of contract is not liable for tax under TNGST Act. (b) During the assessment year 2003-04, the petitioner had opted for....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ions on 24.06.2010. Without considering the reply given by the petitioner and without giving an opportunity of personal hearing, the respondent has passed the impugned order, dated 30.09.2010. Challenging the same, the petitioner is before this Court. 3. The main contention of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is that without considering the reply given by the petitioner and without providing an opportunity of personal hearing, the respondent has passed the impugned order, dated 30.09.2010. Hence, the impugned order is liable to be set aside. 4. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondent would submit that in the impugned order, it is clearly stated that the objections given by the petitioner,....