TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (7) TMI 719
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... disposed of. ' 3.Subject matter of the instant writ petition arises under 'Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 (Tamil Nadu Act 32 of 2006)', which shall hereinafter be referred to as 'TNVAT Act' for brevity. 4.It is not in dispute that the writ petitioner before this Court is a dealer under TNVAT Act. 5. This Court is also informed that writ petitioner was filing monthly returns under Section 21 of TNVAT Act and there was deemed assessment under Section 22(2) of TNVAT Act. 6. Under such circumstances, the business premises of the writ petitioner was inspected by officials of the Enforcement Wing i.e., jurisdictional Enforcement Wing during the period 31.05.2016 to 16.08.2016. The Enforcement Wing officers v....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Be that as it may, it is also noticed that with regard to the proposal for which objections were called for, the proposal was to tax at a turn over of Rs. 14,09,57,486/- and the tax due is Rs. 93,72,607/-. To be noted, this is for Assessment Year 2013-2014. However after the aforesaid exercise of site being demonstrated to the dealer wherein the defective aspects in the website were noticed, the tax due was dropped from Rs. 93,72,607/- to Rs. 80,95,887/-. 10. Therefore in the considered opinion of this Court what comes out clearly is that there has been an exercise that has been carried out by the respondent in the course of passing the impugned order. That exercise is showing the TNVAT site in the system to the dealer wherein all the de....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nvoices match, but it is the numerical values which did not match. 15. Learned Revenue counsel adverting to the aforesaid aspects of the impugned order particularly paragraph extracted and reproduced supra and the aspect of proposed tax of Rs. 93.72 lakhs being dropped to Rs. 80.85 submits that the Assessing Officer has applied his mind, has gone through the exercise of comparing the supporting documents filed by the writ petitioner along with the reply and has embarked upon the exercise of enquiring into the mismatch and therefore JKM Graphics principle does not come to the aid of the writ petitioner in the instant case. 16. There is no difficulty in accepting the submission that the impugned order has been passed after the exercise ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e [Authorized Officer, State Bank of Travancore Vs. Mathew K.C. reported in (2018) 3 SCC 85]. Relevant paragraph in K.C.Mathew case is Paragraph 10 and the same reads as follows: '10. In Satyawati Tondon the High Court had restrained further proceedings under Section 13(4) of the Act. Upon a detailed consideration of the statutory scheme under the SARFAESI Act, the availability of remedy to the aggrieved under Section 17 before the Tribunal and the appellate remedy under Section 18 before the Appellate Tribunal, the object and purpose of the legislation, it was observed that a writ petition ought not to be entertained in view of the alternate statutory remedy available holding: (SCC pp.123 & 128, Paras 43 & 55) ....