TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (4) TMI 1640
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ch at Coimbatore, dated 16.11.2006 in Appeal No.414 of 2000, in this Writ Petition. 2. The case of the petitioner as stated in the affidavit filed in support of this Writ Petition and as argued by the learned counsel Mrs.R.Hemalatha for the petitioner is that the petitioner's late father was carrying on a proprietorship business in the name and style of "Durai Oil Mill" dealing in groundnut pods and groundnut kernels, who was an assessee on the file of the Commercial Tax Officer, Perundurai in TNGST No.2920761. During the assessment year 1996-97, the father of the petitioner had reported a total and taxable value of Rs. 1,14,000/- by way of returns in Form-A1. It was further stated by the learned counsel that the Enforcement Wing ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o after hearing the parties, had passed an order in Appeal No.414 of 2000 dated 16.11.2006, which is the order impugned herein. The first respondent had set aside the order passed by the second respondent by allowing the Appeal filed by the State Department. Aggrieved by the first respondent's order sustaining the order of the third respondent, the petitioner has filed this Writ Petition before this Court challenging the same. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the first respondent had set aside the well considered order of the second respondent, which is perse illegal on the fact that the first respondent failed to appreciate that whenever particular suppressed turnover deducted at the time of inspection of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he book turnover and refixed the taxable turnover of Rs. 1,25,510/-. Against the Appeal orders, department filed State Appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal (Additional Bench), Coimbatore and the said State Appeal was allowed on merits after verification of the records and restored the original order of the Assessing Authority in CTSA No.414 of 2000 dated 16.11.2006 and Assessing Authority given effect of the Tribunal order, demanded balance of tax of Rs. 22,901/- and penalty of Rs. 47,852/- and initiated recovery proceedings under R.R. Act by issue of Form-1 notice to the petitioner to collect the arrears. It is against the Tribunal order and also against the collection of arrears under R.R. Act, the present Writ Petition have bee....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....purchases were accounted for by the dealer or not is not at all the question of botheration by the Market Committee and they are only concerned with the collection of cess for the purchases made from them and he would also reiterate that the said stock book produced before the inspection authorities is only a fabricated one. 7. Heard both the counsels and perused the materials on record. 8. On perusal of the records and upon hearing the arguments by both the parties, it is clear that during the assessment year 1996-97, the petitioner's father was running a proprietary concern, who had purchased 323 bags of groundnut kernels from a registered dealer and groundnuts purchased, for which the tax has been paid. However it is on the dat....