TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (9) TMI 1180
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y consent of the learned counsel appearing for both sides, all these writ petitions are heard together and being disposed of by this common order. 2.As against the impugned order of assessment dated 05.02.2021, though there is an appeal provided under Section 107 of the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017(in short 'the Act'), such an appeal has not been filed, and these writ petitions had been filed, challenging these assessment orders on the only ground that the personal hearing, which is mandated under Section 75 (4) of the Act had not been given to the petitioner. 3.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, who having reiterated the aforesaid, would invite the attention of this Court, that before passi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e, on that ground, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks indulgence of this Court. 4.Per contra, Mr.R.Suresh Kumar, learned Government Advocate, appearing for the respondent has relied upon the following findings given by the respondent in the impugned assessment orders: "To the notices issued to the taxable persons on above lines, by inviting him to file his objections, if any to the above proposals in writing before the undersigned on or before 04.12.2020 along with proper supportive documents for each and every issues separately. He was also given personal hearing in this regard on 04.12.2020 and was requested to appear before the undersigned to represent his case in detail along with the connected records and document....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rson had reiterated the contentions raised by him in his reply of objections and requested not to levy penalty as per the notice issued and further requested to pass final orders by considering his reply of objections. The replies furnished by the tax payer along with the copies of ledger account details and certain copies of invoices filed by him were verified carefully along with the defects mentioned in the pre-assessment notice and are hereby discussed as detailed below:" 5.By relying upon this findings recorded by the Assessment Officer, Mr.R.Suresh Kumar, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent, would stress the point that, it is not the first time, at least two or three times, such an opportunity of personal heari....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d by an order of a Court or Appellate Tribunal, the period of such stay shall be excluded in computing the period specified in sub-sections (2) and (10) of section 73 or sub sections (2) and (10) of section 74, as the case may be. (2) Where any Appellate Authority or Appellate Tribunal or Court concludes that the notice issued under sub-section (1) of section 74 is not sustainable for the reason that the charges of fraud or any wilful-mis statement or suppression of facts to evade tax has not been established against the person to whom the notice was issued, the proper office shall determine the tax payable by such person, deeming as if the notice were issued under subsection (1) of section 73. (3) Where any order is requi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... again he was invited by the office of the respondent to file his objection and also requested him to appear before the respondent office for personal hearing on 14.12.2020. However, on 14.12.2020, the taxable person had filed an adjournment letter and the taxable person, in his adjournment letter dated 14.12.2020, had requested a further time of 15 days. 9.That was also accepted and allowing the same, as requested by the petitioner, a further time of 15 days was given to the petitioner and a notice was issued to the petitioner from the respondent office on 15.12.2020 inviting him to file objection on or before 29.12.2020 and a personal hearing was also provided to him on 29.12.2020. 10.Even this opportunity was not utilised as he did....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to grant maximum number of adjournments only three times, hence, that would be treated only maximum but not minimum. If the Assessee has not utilised the same, another opportunity need not be given to the Assessee as a matter of right. If we strictly construe the provision of Sub Section 4 of Section 75 of the Act, it is mandated that, only one opportunity shall be given, if that opportunity has not been utilised, on sufficient reasons, by way of any adjournment letter, if any other/further opportunity was sought for, that can be considered and granted only by the Officer concerned, who deal with the matter and in this regard, the law does not mandate that, mandatorily three such personal hearings shall be given to the Assessee. Therefore,....