TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (5) TMI 118
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... tax periods, April 2010 to March 2011 and consequential notice of demand dated 11.04.2017. 3. The petitioner is a Private Limited Company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 and was registered under the provisions of the Act, as a dealer during the relevant tax periods. The petitioner is engaged in the business of providing Network and IT Infrastructure Solutions which include the re-sale of equipment and installation thereof apart from providing Annual Maintenance Contract (AMC). The petitioner is also a service tax provider registered under the provisions of the Finance Act, 1994. For the tax periods, April 2010 to March 2011 the prescribed authority issued proposition notice dated 02.02.2017 pursuant to which....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ty for rejecting one week's time to produce the documents, as it is time barred case is ex-facie unjustifiable since the prescribed authority had seven years time to conclude the assessment relating to the tax periods in question i.e. tax period of 2010-11 in terms of the second proviso to Section 40 of the Act. The business of the petitioner being spread over across ten states, it was obligatory on the part of the prescribed authority to provide an adequate opportunity to the petitioner to meet the requirements made in terms of the endorsement dated 17.03.2017. 5. The total tax liability determined by the prescribed authority ignoring the rendition of services and the turnover of other states is contrary to the principles of natural ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt dated 17.03.2017. The endorsement dated 17.03.2017 indicates that on verification of the objections filed by the assessee in response to the proposition notice along with revenue details, the assessee has failed to furnish the following details:- "1) In other State: i.e. Details of registration, Vat returns filed to other states, etc. 2) Non Vatable Revenue: failed to provide service tax details, invoices related to commission and financial adjustment details. 3) e-Sugam: Category- To Shop- failed to provide L.R. Copies, bank statements and other connected documents. 4) Export sales: Failed to provide high sea details, export details and other related documents otherwise tax @5% will be levied."....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fore it. The extent of the application of the principles also depends upon the fact situation of a given case." Thus the extent of the application of principles depend upon the fact situation of a given case. It is observed in paragraph 22 by the cognate Bench as under:- "22. Only a prima-facie look at the facts about the opportunity being given to the assessee or not and whether the question of vires as raised is really involved or not, can be looked into at the first blush. Even question validity of Rules cannot be allowed only as a tangent ground for maintaining the writ petition. That should be a serious challenge, which prima-facie requires interpretation and analysis by the constitutional courts and because those questions....