2024 (5) TMI 255

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....>Honourable Mr. Justice C. Saravanan For the Petitioner : Mr.Raja.Karthikeyan For the Respondent : Mr.N.Dilip Kumar Standing Counsel ORDER The petitioner has challenged the impugned assessment order dated 17.01.2024 passed by the respondent for the assessment year 2017-2018 to 2019-2020. The impugned order is challenged primarily on the ground that the demand has been confirmed for the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he petitioner failed to produce any records to substantiate that the petitioner has paid the tax under the VAT regime, earlier demand has been confirmed. It is submitted that either way there is suppression of fact by the petitioner and therefore, the impugned order does not call for any interference. 3. The learned Standing Counsel for the respondent would further submit that even otherwise, t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... order was completed as is contemplated under the provisions of the TNVAT Act, 2006, the demand cannot be said to be time barred, in which case appropriate demand notice under Section 27 of the TNVAT Act, 2006 can be issued. These are aspects, which will have to be considered by the appellate Commissioner on merits and in accordance with law. 6. Therefore, the Writ Petition is liable to be dism....