2024 (5) TMI 173

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... For Respondent : Mr. C. Harsha Raj, Additional Government Pleader (T) ORDER The petitioner assails an assessment order dated 28.12.2023 largely on the ground that the said order is non speaking. 2. The petitioner states that it is engaged in the wholesale and retail trading of grocery and agricultural produce. By an audit notice dated 04.05.2023, about 13 defects in the petitioner's ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....thereafter to the impugned order. He contended that the impugned order exhibits complete non application of mind and that said order is unreasoned. By way of illustration, learned counsel referred to the second head dealt with therein relating to 'turnover mismatch'. He submitted that the assessing officer referred to the petitioner's reply and thereafter merely recorded that the reply....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ent from the list of enclosures to the reply. 4. Mr. C. Harsha Raj, learned Additional Government Pleader, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent. He refutes the contention that a personal hearing was not provided by pointing out that such personal hearing was provided to the petitioner on more than one occasion i.e. 09.10.2023 and 14.12.2023. 5. On examining the impugned order, it is ev....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... used partly for effecting taxable supplies and partly for effecting exempt supplies. The latter conclusion appears to be clearly contrary to the submissions made by the assessee. As regards tax liability under the head 'sundry creditors', the petitioner/assessee stated that the payments to creditors are below 180 days and Rule 37 was not contravened. It was further stated that no ITC was ....