TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (5) TMI 470
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d 23.08.2010, wherein, the petitioner has been called upon to pay a sum of Rs. 1,35,550/- under Section 72 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006. 2. The petitioner claims to have purchased imported timbers numbering in 7 form New Patel Saw Mill, Shencottah, Tirunelveli District. The consignment was reported by delivered to Sri Swastik Saw Mill, Erode enroute from Shencottah to Coimbatore for the purpose of cutting and sawing. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that the consignment was delivered to Sri Swastik Saw Mill, Erode on 08.08.2010 as the said Sri Swastik Saw Mill had necessary sawing machines for cutting timbers/logs of bigger size. The Said Sri Swastik Saw Mill, Erode, however, could only cut and deliver 4 out of 7 logs to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... amount equal to two times of tax as compounding fee as was fixed by the 3rd respondent Roving Squad Officer vide the impugned order before the 2nd respondent. 8. Though the writ petition is of the year 2011, the respondents had not filed their counter. However, on instructions, the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents submits that the impugned order is liable to be sustained as the petitioner has not clearly explained the transaction and authorities acting under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 have passed a fair order. It is further submitted that when the goods were detained, there was no proper documents to substantiate and correlate that the goods allegedly sold on 06.08.2010 vide ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....has also enclosed the copy of another delivery Form JJ dated 03.09.2010 to show that the balance of 3 logs valuing Rs. 6,30,000/0 approximately were being sent back to the petitioner as per invoice dated 12. It is not clear how invoice dated 31.08.2010 can be relied in support of the purchase of 7 logs on 06.08.2010. The petitioner has also not stated these facts before the 2nd respondent. The petitioner had earlier purchased 7 logs from the said M/s.New Patel Saw Mill, Shengottah on 06.08.2010 and had purportedly delivered the same to Sri Swastik Saw Mill, Erode for cutting and sawing. However, a new invoice dated 31.08.2010 has been filed to substantiate the same transaction. This raises doubt. Two transactions cannot be one and t....