2022 (12) TMI 1037

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....as been filed assailing a 'notice dated 25.11.2022 bearing reference No.33291026289/2022/A4 issued by the lone respondent' [hereinafter 'impugned notice' for the sake of convenience and clarity]. 3. Owing to the narrow compass on which the matter turns, short facts will suffice. Short facts shorn of granular particulars are that the petitioner company is a registered dealer qua erstwhile 'the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 (Tamil Nadu Act No.32 of 2006)' [hereinafter 'TNVAT Act' for the sake of convenience and clarity]; that on the GST (Goods and Services Tax) regime coming into force on and from 01.07.2017, erstwhile TNVAT Act stood subsumed; that those of dealers who had 'Input Tax Credit' ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....regime. 4. Highlighting the aforementioned facts, learned counsel on record for writ petitioner submits that there are two options i.e., carry forward and refund and when the writ petitioner has opted for refund, the impugned order ought not to have been issued particularly when a provisional refund order has been issued after processing the refund application. 5. Ms.Amirta Dinakaran, learned Government Advocate accepted notice for lone respondent and on instructions, learned Government Advocate, adverting to the aforementioned 06.10.2022 provisional refund order made by lone respondent submitted that the dealer has taken the position that it had mistakenly reversed ITC in June 2017 and that has led to the issue of impugned notice. ....