2021 (5) TMI 924

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the impugned proceedings of the second respondent. 2. The petitioners are the work contractors registered with the second respondent. According to the petitioners, the second respondent after passing deemed cum original assessment orders under Section 22(2) of the TNVAT Act, had revised the assessment order under Section 27 of the TNVAT Act, by adding adhoc addition for certain defects in the accounts. The grievance of the petitioner is that the second respondent passed the impugned Revision of Assessment order even without any new/fresh facts, de hors the records and on mere change of opinion, which is against the provisions of the TNVAT Act. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would rely upon the similar order of this Court ma....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....i Chettiar and Bros). The said decision was followed in the decision reported in (2011) 37 V.S.T. 592 (mad) (Rainbow Foundations Ltd., V.Assistant Commissioner (C.T)(FAC), T.Nagar (South) Assessment Circle, Chennai). It has been held that an order passed by the assessing authority levying penalty through an independent order is bad in law. Therefore, respectfully following the aforesaid decisions, the orders of penalty imposed in these writ petitions stand set aside. 5.A mere look at the impugned orders indicates that the impugned exercise was undertaken not pursuant to any discovery of new material. The very recital paragraph starts as follows:- "Verification of the assessment records reveals that..." It....