2018 (10) TMI 385

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... assessment order, dated 28.11.1997, rejecting the petitioner's claim that their receipts towards the head "Hank Yarn Obligation" is not liable to be taxed under the TNGST Act, and levying tax of Rs. 1,54,553/-, surcharge of Rs. 23,183/-, additional sales tax of Rs. 48,298/- and a penalty of Rs. 1,18,105/-. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner had preferred an appeal before the appellate authority. During the pendency of the said appeal, the petitioner had paid the entire disputed tax, surcharge and additional sales tax. But, the first appellate authority has allowed the appeal and thereby, directed the respondents to refund the amount paid. 2. Aggrieved over the order of the first appellate authority, the State had preferred a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....order ie., from 28.11.1997 and that he has failed to pay 90% of the amount along with the application. Hence, challenging the said order, the petitioner is before this Court. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that though the petitioner claimed that he is liable to pay interest only from the date of order passed in the revision petition, he is now ready to pay the balance amount of interest ie., Rs. 48,179/- as claimed by the first respondent. He would further submit that if the first respondent brought to the knowledge of the petitioner that he should pay interest from the date of original demand by providing a reasonable opportunity as contemplated under Section 8(2) of the Samadhan Act, the petitioner would....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....oner mainly stating that the penal interest of Rs. 52,614/- which has been calculated from the date of original order dated 28.11.1997, has not been paid by the petitioner and thereby, after deducting the interest already paid by the petitioner, a sum of Rs. 48,179/- has to be paid by the petitioner. In respect of the penal interest is concerned, now the petitioner submitted that he is ready to pay the balance interest amount of Rs. 48,179/- as demanded by the first respondent in the impugned order. 8. The proviso to Section 8(2) of the Samadhan Act clearly provides that "no order under this Section shall be passed without giving the applicant a reasonable opportunity of showing cause against such refusal". But, in this case, as rightly st....