2019 (3) TMI 772

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ter referred to as 'TNVAT Act']. According to the petitioner, he is a small time manufacturer of pillows and his total taxable turn over for the year 2013 - 2014 was only Rs. 4,00,276/- under Section 22(2) of the TNVAT Act. According to the petitioner, he has been filing his annual returns in Form - I-1 reporting the purchase and sales turn over effected during the year 2013 - 2014 on 23.06.2014 and the respondent accepted the annual returns. 3.According to the petitioner, the revision of assessment was proposed by the respondent under Section 27(1) of the Act by notice dated 30.09.2016, based on the representation of the enforcement wing officers dated 24.08.2016, without verifying the books and records and the objections dated ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nt year 2013 - 2014 at Rs. 1,00,28,780/-, under Section 27 of TNVAT Act. According to the respondents, the petitioner has also not replied to the notice dated 30.09.2016 issued under Section 27 of the Act and only after giving sufficient opportunity to the petitioner, the impugned assessment order has been passed against the petitioner. 7.Heard Mr.R.D.Ganesan, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr.A.Thiyagarajan, learned Government Advocate for the respondent. 8.In the case on hand, the impugned assessment order has been passed under Section 27 of the TNVAT Act, 2006, on the ground that the petitioner has suppressed the sales to the tune of Rs. 96,28,504/- for the assessment year 2013 - 2014. According to the respondent, the petit....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ght to have considered all the above mentioned factors and should have given sufficient opportunity to the petitioner to place all his objections and also should have given an opportunity to the petitioner to cross examine the alleged purchasers M/s.Jay Jay Agency, Pollachi. But, in the instant case, no such opportunity was given to the petitioner and therefore, the respondent has violated the principles of natural justice. It is settled law that the assessee should be given sufficient opportunity to raise all objections available to them under the TNVAT Act, 2006. But, in the instant case, the petitioner has not been given sufficient opportunity to raise all objections available to him and the respondent has also denied the petitioner the ....