2020 (3) TMI 1091

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... R.MAHADEVAN J. For Petitioner (in all W.Ps.) : Mr. V.Sundareswaran For Respondents (in all W.Ps.) : Mr. A.N.R.Prathap, Govt. Advocate (Taxes)   C O M M O N O R D E R Heard Mr.V.Sundareswaran, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.A.N.R.Prathap, learned Government Advocate (Taxes) for the respondents. 2. The petitioner has filed these writ petitions, challenging the assessment....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....oner has submitted their objections on 14.08.2015 explaining the alleged discrepancies / defects and requested to drop further proceedings. Without considering the same in a proper perspective, the Assessing Officer / R-1 has passed the impugned orders, levying proposed tax at 12.5%, but kept alive the issue of verification of buyer and seller as per Annexure - I by stating that the same will be f....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tions or directions of the higher authorities. Hence, according to the learned counsel, the impugned orders are liable to be quashed. 5. The learned Government Advocate (Taxes) was heard on the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 6. Admittedly, the cause of action for issuing the pre-revision notices was on the basis of the proposal submitted by the Enforcement Wing O....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ssion of these writ petitions.   7. In such view of the matter, this Court is inclined to set-aside the assessment orders dated 29.10.2015 and are set-aside accordingly. The matters are restored to the file of the Assessing Officer / first respondent. The petitioner is directed to file necessary documentary evidence, so as to substantiate their claim that the transactions are not taxable, ....