Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Kurlon Enterprises Limited Vs State Tax Officer (Madras High Court)
Appeal Number : W.P.No. 2793, 2797, 2798 and 2800 of 2020
Date of Judgement/Order : 02/11/2020
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Kurlon Enterprises Limited Vs State Tax Officer (Madras High Court)

The issue under consideration is whether officers can reject claims of sales or returns merely on the assumption of failure to produce documentary evidence?

High Court states that, it would suffice that proceedings initiating an assessment should commence prior to the date of expiry of limitation. In the present case, notices initiating proceedings for revision of assessments have admittedly been issued on 17.02.2017 in all cases, before the expiry of the period of limitation. This argument is thus rejected. Coming to the merits of the matter, there was a surprise inspection by the Enforcement Wing Officials on 16.08.2016 in the business premises of the petitioner and pursuant to the audit of accounts, various defects were pointed out by the Officers. The petitioner has, on 03.08.2017 written to the respondent officer annexing sales returns statements, along with the invoice number and date of transaction for the four years in question. The communication states that copies of credit notes with sample sales return note as well as invoices were also annexed. Thereafter, under letter dated 29.11.2017, some more details have been annexed along with pen drive containing relevant documentation. The text of the communication indicates that sample bills have been furnished for the periods in question. It is not in dispute that these communications have, in fact, been received by the officers. Be that as it may, it was incumbent on the part of the Officer to have tabulated the materials filed by the assessee in the first instance and compare the same with the requirements of the aforesaid Rule and thereafter come to a conclusion as to whether the Rule stands satisfied. This exercise has not been done and the Officer merely rejects the petitioner’s contention on the assumption that there is a failure to produce documentary evidence in support of the claim of sales/returns. HC is of the view that the exercise of reconciliation has not been conducted in the manner as required by law. The impugned assessments are thus set aside.

FULL TEXT OF THE HIGH COURT ORDER /JUDGEMENT

The petitioner challenges orders of assessment passed in terms of the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 (in short ‘Act’) for the periods 2009-10 to 2012-13, all dated 16.12.2019.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031