TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (3) TMI 499
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on and authority of law. 2. The petitioner is a registered dealer in vegetable oil and assessee on the files of the respondent. In respect of his turnover being below the taxable limit of Rs. 5 crores, he claimed exemption in accordance with Notification in G.O.Ms.No.76 CT & R (B1) Department dated 11.07.2011 and the order of deemed assessment was also completed in accordance with Section 22(2) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 [in short 'TNVAT Act'] 3. However, the respondent issued a notice for revision dated 11.11.2020, proposing to reopen the original assessment by adding 15% of the book turnover and propose to assess the turnover on the ground that after adding 15% of the addition to the book turnover, it exceed....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., according to the petitioner, has been acceded to by the said officer. 8. However, subsequently, without giving such an opportunity as sought for and acceded to by the officer concerned, they proceed to pass orders vide impugned order dated 27.08.2021, which was received by the petitioner on 03.09.2021. Therefore, on the only ground that the opportunity sought for though was orally accepted it was not given to the petitioner to present his case in the personal hearing beyond 13.08.2021, the petitioner has challenged the order impugned in this writ petition. 9. Reiterating the aforesaid, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would contend that, on 13.08.2021 since the very same representative, who appeared not only for the peti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t time, when was contacted, he has stated that he cannot recollect what was happened on that day as to whether any such request was made on behalf of the petitioner or not. When that being so, in the absence of any proof to show that there was a request made on 13.08.2021 to the officer concerned of the revenue to give a deferred date for the personal hearing in respect of the petitioner herein for want of time and production of voluminous documents, the petitioner's case cannot be accepted. 14. Therefore, it can very well be construed according to the learned Government Advocate that, on 13.08.2021, there was no appearance on behalf of the petitioner as the personal hearing chance given to the petitioner was not utilized. Therefore,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o the representative of the sister concern had appeared before the same officer on 13.08.2021, who after completing the two other cases in respect of the sister concern, for want of time, when a request was orally made by the petitioner's representative, that was acceded to. However, that has not been put into writting. In this context, though it is vehemently contended by the learned Government Advocate that there is no written request or proof to show that such request has been made by the representative of the petitioner on appearance on 13.08.2021 to give a deferred date, the stand taken by the petitioner cannot be accepted, this Court feel that, when the petitioner's representative did appear before the very same officer on 13.....