2022 (1) TMI 1064

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... C.SARAVANAN For Petitioner: Mr.P.Raj Kumar For Respondents: Ms.Amirta Poonkodi Dinakaran Government Advocate ORDER The petitioner had earlier challenged notice issued to the petitioner for recovering the ineligible credit availed by the petitioner contrary to Section 19(11) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006. 2. These writ petitions were disposed along with a batch by this....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e submits that the impugned order is liable to be quashed. 5. Opposing the prayer, the learned Government Advocate for the respondent submits that the issue is squarely covered against the petitioner in terms of the above decision cited by the learned counsel for the petitioner himself and therefore there is no merits in this writ petition. Asfaras the penalty is concerned, it is submitted that....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ore, on merits as far as the demand of the input tax credit is concerned there is no case made out by the petitioner. 9. Under these circumstances, the petitioner is directed to pay the amount confirmed in the impugned orders for a sum of Rs. 70,720-00 and Rs. 2,84,642-00 for the respective Assessment Year. As far as the imposition of penalty which appears to be 200% of the amount confirmed in ....