2019 (3) TMI 1212

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Act, 2006 and he has filed his annual returns and the same has been accepted by the second respondent under Section 22(2) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006. According to the petitioner, the second respondent proposed to revise the assessment under Section 27 of the TNVAT Act, 2006, as per the pre-revision notice dated 14.10.2015. According to the petitioner, for the fault of the other end seller for non-reporting of sales to the respondents, the petitioner who is a purchaser cannot be made liable to pay tax. It is their case that all the purchases effected by them have been reported to the second respondent and there is no suppression. According to the petitioner, without issuing any notice, the impugned assessment order has been....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ssessment order under Section 51 of the 'Act' and therefore this Writ Petition is not maintainable. Further, it is his case that based on the details and vouchers submitted by the petitioner to the respondents, tax was also reduced under the impugned assessment order. Hence, there is no violation of principles of natural justice. Discussion:- 6.It is an undisputed fact that the main reason for revision of assessment under Section 27 of the 'Act' by the respondents are that the other end seller has not reported to the respondents the sales made to the petitioner. It is seen from the records that the purchases made by the petitioner from the other end seller have been duly reported to the second respondent by the petitio....