1. Notice in this writ petition was issued on 20.12.2016. Despite service, no counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent.
2. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 21.10.2016 passed on the application filed under Section 84 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 (in short the Act).
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner says that the order is not sustainable, as it refers to matters, which were not adverted to, in the notice dated 09.08.2016. 3.1. According to the learned counsel, the notice adverted to the proposal to reverse the Input Tax Credit (ITC) on the ground that requisite C Form declarations had not been filed by the petitioner. 3.2. Learned counsel for the petitioner says that in the assessment order, which followed the notice dated 09.08.2016, the respondent not only taxed the turn over, which was not covered by the declaration forms, albeit, at the higher rate, i.e., 14.5%, but also, disallowed exemption claimed under
Section 8(5) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (in short the CST Act).
3.3. It is the submission of the petitioner that, therefore, the rectification application was filed, qua the assessment order dated 16.09.2016. 3.4. Learned counsel for the petitioner draws my attention to the impugned order to support his submissions. 3.5. Furthermore, learned counsel submits that while disallowing exemption under
Section 8(5) of the CST, 1956, the respondent has also included a sum of Rs.12,70,440/- in respect of the inter-state sales, for which, it is claimed by the respondent that C Forms were filed in excess. 3.6. In sum, it is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that these aforementioned aspects were not adverted to, in the proposal of the respondent, to levy tax, which was communicated via notice dated 09.10.2016, and therefore, the impugned order was at variance with the proposal.
4. This aspect, being apparent, on the face of the record, cannot, but be conceded to, by the learned counsel for the respondent.
5. In these circumstances, the impugned order is set aside. The respondent is directed to pass a fresh order qua the rectification petition filed by the petitioner under Section 84 of the 2006 Act, after affording due opportunity to the petitioner. RAJIV SHAKDHER, J.
gg
6. The writ petition and the pending application are disposed of in terms of the aforementioned direction. There shall, however, be no order as to costs.
12.01.2017 gg To The Commercial Tax Officer, Sowcarpet Assessment Circle, No.48/39, Rajaji Salai, Chennai-600 001.
W.P.No.43710 of 2016 http://www.judis.nic.in