TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (3) TMI 223
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Tax Act, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as TNVAT Act, 2006) and the impugned notices dated 20.12.2021, calling upon the petitioner to pay the amount confined vide order dated 24.12.2020 for rectification of the aforesaid order under Section 84 of the TNVAT Act, 2006. 2. The issues involved in these Writ Petitions are similar in nature and hence, they are disposed of by this common order. 3. The dispute in these Writ Petitions are confined to the assessment years 2011-2012, 2012-2013 and 2013-2014. The petitioner had filed regular monthly returns for these assessment years under Section 21 of the TNVAT Act, 2006 read with Rule 7 of the TNVAT Rules, 2007. 4. It is the specific case of the petitioner that the assessments were deemed to have....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the petitioner were exempted in terms of Entry 10 of Part-A of IV Schedule to the TNVAT Act, 2006. 8. It is admitted that the petitioner earlier had suffered an adverse order dated 24.12.2014 in the hands of the Advance Ruling Authority under Section 48-A of the TNVAT Act, 2006. It is therefore submitted that it cannot be said that monthly returns that were filed were either incorrectly or were incomplete and therefore, the invocation of machinery to revise the assessment under the provisions of TNVAT Act, 2006 were within the limitation. 9. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that all the monthly returns were filed by the petitioner by the due date and therefore it was open for the Assessing Officer to either assess the p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r Section 22(2) of the TNVAT Act, 2006 expired on 31.10.2018, 31.10.2019 and on 31.10.2020. Therefore, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order has to go. 13. On behalf of the petitioner, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the following cases:- i. Tv.Pupa Lineraa vs. The State Tax Officer, W.P.(MD)No.14494 of 2021; ii. M/s.Nyle Garments vs. The Assistant Commissioner (ST), W.P.No.9891 of 2022. 14. The learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondent on the other hand would submit that the petitioner had wrongly claimed exemption under Entry 10 of Part-A of IV Schedule to the TNVAT Act, 2006 and therefore, the monthly returns that was filed by the petitioner for the respectiv....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ct, 2006, vide Advanced Ruling ACAAR vide Order No.88/2014-2015 dated 24.12.2014. That order has not been disturbed. 20. The said Ruling is binding as far as the petitioner and the respondent are concerned. Therefore, in absence of a challenge to the aforesaid ruling of the Authority for clarification in Advanced Ruling ACAAR vide Order No.88/2014-2015 dated 24.12.2014 in the manner known to law, the monthly returns that were filed by the petitioner for the respective assessment years are to be held to be incorrect and contrary to the above clarification. 21. Sub Section (3) to Section 48-A of the TNVAT Act, 2006 makes it clear that the Ruling of the Advance Ruling Authority is binding not only on the petitioner, but also on the responden....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in time with all the particulars as was required for completing the assessment. 27. In this case, if the petitioner had filed correct returns with full particulars, the limitation for reopening the assessment under Section 27 of the TNVAT, Act, 2006 for the respective assessment years, would have expired on the following dates:- W.P.No. Assessment Year Expiry of Limitation 513 of 2022 2011-2012 31.10.2018 516 of 2022 2012-2013 31.10.2019 518 of 2022 2013-2014 31.10.2020 28. Impugned assessment orders dated 24.12.2020 preceeds notices dated 4.11.2020. This was during the period when the country was under lockdown due to out break of Covid-19 pandemic. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has saved the limitation in In Re: Cognizance Fo....