TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (2) TMI 405
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e provisions of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 [hereinafter referred to as "the TNVAT Act"] for the assessment year 2014-15 and 2015-16 respectively. 3.Before the learned writ court the assessee mainly canvassed two points. Firstly with regard to the allegation that the purchase effected from registration cancelled dealers and the second issue was with regard to the mismatch in the returns filed by the purchasing and selling dealer. The assessee placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Maharashtra vs. Suresh Trading Company [1998 109 STC 439 (SC)] and the judgment of this Court in the case of M/s.JKM Graphics Solutions Private Limited vs. The Commercial Tax Officer, Vepery Assessmen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....appellate remedy. Accordingly, writ petitions were disposed of by relegating the appelant to avail the statutory appellate remedy. Challenging the said order, the appellant is before us by way of these appeals. 5.We have elaborately heard Mr.S.Raveekumar, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr.Mohammed Shaffiq, learned Special Government Pleader for the respondent. 6.The grounds raised in the writ petitions have been reiterated and canvassed in a slightly different form before us as the learned counsel who appears in the appeals did not appear in the writ petitions. In the typed set, apart from material papers the learned counsel has also enclosed as many as 16 judgments and orders. These decision have been pressed into service to stat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to by the appellant. Thus, we need to see as to whether the Assessing Officer had examined the issues or in a summary manner completed the assessment. To examine this, we take into consideration the order of assessment dated 22.11.2018 for the assessment year 2014-15. To be noted that the re-assessment proceedings commenced pursuant to a surprise inspection conducted in the place of business of the appellant on 13.07.2017. A show cause notice has been issued and details of invoice wise mismatch was furnished to the appellant. The appellant submitted the reply on 11.05.2017 stating that they have purchased from registered dealers by paying tax. The appellant also referred to various decision of this Court. The correctness of the same was ex....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lls from the dealers whose registration was cancelled. Hence, it is clear that their contention is not sustainable but a trial." 8.Thus, we find that not only the stand taken by the appellant was examined by the Assessing Officer but the Assessing Officer has gone one step further to observe that the dealers have not furnished any documentary evidence for proof for movement of goods without which the physical occurrence of the transaction cannot be established. Therefore, we are not inclined to accept the submission made on behalf of the appellant that the Assessing Officer has brushed aside the legal position and concluded the assessment rather the Assessing Officer has rendered a opinion on the available facts and taking note of the re....