2019 (5) TMI 909

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., which was filed by the respondent-State challenging the order passed by the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), Chennai-Central, the first appellate authority in A.P.No.604 of 2015, dated 30.04.2016. 2.The appeal filed by the State was allowed by the impugned order. To be noted that the petitioner earlier though was served with a notice from the Tribunal, did not appear and was set ex parte on 23.03.2017 and therefore, the Tribunal has proceeded to decide the matter on merits and allowed the appeal. 3.This tax case revision has been filed raising the following substantial questions of law:- "(a) Whether the assessment made by the Assessing Authority on the levy of purchase tax on the purchases made from unregistered dealers....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ows labour charges as Rs. 1,38,44,682/- and there exists shortage of turnover. Therefore, there was a proposal to revise the deemed assessment under Section 27(1)(a) of the TNVAT Act. 7.The petitioner submitted a reply dated 02.11.2015 stating that they are paying tax on the basis of commodity wise deemed sale value, the deemed sale value is arrived taking into account the purchases made from registered and unregistered dealers plus gross profit thereon and hence, the question of payment of tax on the purchase under Section 12 and contract receipt does not arise. The Assessing Officer rejected the objection filed by the petitioner/dealer and revised the assessment, vide order dated 17.11.2015. The Assessing Officer held that so far as pu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y took a specific stand that the deemed sale value is arrived taking into account the purchases made from registered and unregistered dealers plus gross profit thereon. However, the Assessing Officer did not deal with the said contention presumably because, the petitioner did not cooperate in the revision of assessment proceedings, as the Assessing Officer has recorded that despite an opportunity of personal hearing granted to the petitioner/dealer, he did not avail the same. However, before the appellate authority, the petitioner canvassed the correctness of the revised assessment and the appellate authority has held as follows;- "(10) The appellant during the course of hearing has submitted that all purchases including the purcha....