2025 (7) TMI 407

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ated 30.10.2015. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the respondent's business place was inspected by the officers of the Enforcement Wing from 06.04.2015 to 10.04.2015 and the officials noticed some defects. Based on the inspection report, the Assessing Officer had revised the assessments of the respondent herein for the years 2012-2013, 2014-2015 and 2011-2012 and passed revised Assessment Orders dated 30.10.2015 and 20.11.2015, as the case may be, under Section 27(1), 22(4) and Section 27(1)(a) of the TNVAT Act, 2006 and also levied penalty of Rs.12,27,775/- Rs.14,52,708/- and Rs.21,78,294/- respectively. 3. As against the orders of the assessing officer, the respondent herein/assessee had preferred appeals before the appellate....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... officer had revised the assessment by levying tax and penalty against the respondent herein as stated supra. 5. Before the appellate authority, the respondent had made a specific plea that the assessing officer has not furnished any details with regard to the name of the seller, bill number, date, value of the goods and the mode of transport in the assessment order. The inspecting authority without verifying the records, which was the basis for the assessing authority to pass revised assessment order, had imposed penalty and fine as per section 27(3) and Section 22(5) of the Act. Taking note of the failure to mention the details of the seller name, bill number, date, value of the goods and the mode of transport in the assessment order, th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ing the same, the State has preferred appeals before the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal and the Tribunal has also dismissed the appeals and hence the State has filed these petitions. 8. It is not in dispute that the respondent has submitted his returns for the years 2011-2012, 2012-2013 and 2014-2015. For the assessment year 2012- 2013, the assessing authority has estimated the turnover as Rs.1,12,89,882/- for the reason that purchases to the tune of Rs.3,07,832/- were not declared in the monthly returns. Adding freight and profit, the assessing offficer has estimated the above sales turnover and revised the assessment. Though copies of the bills were requested for verification, the inspecting officers and the assessing officer ha....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....no material furnished by the inspecting officer and the assessing authority to arrive at the determination, the impugned order is not in accordance with law. 11. This Court in Sri Ramu Furniture Company v. State of Tamil Nadu reported in 2011 SCC OnLine Mad 2712 : (2013) 57 VST 383, held as follows: "2. The only ground on which the Tribunal restored the equal time addition was the results of the inspection made on February 18, 1999, during the course of the subsequent assessment year 1997-98. Barring that, there were no other materials to restore the equal time addition. It is no doubt true that in the assessment year under consideration, there was an inspection done on March 6, 1997. Except for the deficiency in stock of goods not suppo....