TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (5) TMI 708
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... as sought for by the petitioner in his replies dated 16.11.2018 and 12.12.2018 and pass an assessment order afresh in the light of the guidelines enunciated in the decision of M/s.JKM Solutions Private Limited reported in 2017(99) VST 343 (Mad). 2. It is the case of the petitioner that he is a registered dealer under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax (TN VAT) Act, 2006. According to the petitioner, for the assessment year 2014-15, the respondent accepted the returns filed by the petitioner under Section 22(2) of TN VAT Act 2006. Based on the verification of the department website, the respondent has issued a common notice dated 07.05.2018 to the petitioner for the Assessment years 2010-11 to 2015-16, wherein it was stated that the petition....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hich according to the petitioner are irrelevant. By letter dated 13.09.2018, the petitioner requested the respondent to grant time to produce records for the Assessment years 2010-2011 to 2015-16. But, according to the petitioner, instead of granting time, the respondent issued a notice dated 18.09.2018 rejecting the request of the petitioner to grant further time but instead directed the petitioner to produce the records within seven(07) days. 6. According to the petitioner, he sent another reply dated 23.09.2018 to the respondent requesting them to furnish the break up details of the taxable turn over arrived by them. According to the petitioner, once again, the petitioner requested the respondent to extend the time for production of r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to enable the petitioner to file a detailed reply. 8. It is admitted by the petitioner that on receiving the reply dated 16.11.2018, the respondent had issued another notice of personal hearing dated 03.12.2018. According to the petitioner, on receipt of the personal hearing notice, he sent a reply dated 12.12.2018 by stating that in the absence of breakup details and clarification on adoption of different figures in their own proceedings, the opportunity of personal hearing will not yield fruitful results. According to the petitioner, he therefore requested the respondent to furnish all the details and clarifications by his replies dated 20.09.2018 and 07.12.2018 and requested the respondent to fix the personal hearing on a different d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... send a detailed reply. 12. In the impugned assessment order, the respondent has extracted the reply dated 23.09.2018 sent by the petitioner to the respondent, wherein the petitioner has admitted that he was not able to maintain detailed accounts as prescribed under the TN VAT Act 2006 and it was also admitted that he has not issued any sales bills to his customers. It was also admitted by him that he has not filed the Tax returns. In the same letter, he has also promised the respondent that he shall furnish the available records before 30.09.2018. Further, it is observed in the impugned assessment order that vide notice dated 03.12.2018 personal hearing was intimated. But inspite of the receipt of the said notice, the dealer did not app....