Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
D. Bharatha Chakravarthy, J
Vars Enterprises – Appellant
Versus
Assistant Commissioner (State Tax) – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background and procedural history regarding the ex-parte assessment order. (Para 1 , 3) |
| 2. court's discretion to grant remand based on conditional deposit of disputed tax. (Para 2 , 4) |
| 3. final orders and terms for setting aside the assessment and remand. (Para 5) |
ORDER
This writ petition challenges the impugned order dated 28.12.2023 which is an assessment order passed under Section 73 of the TNGST Act, 2017.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Standing Counsel for the respondent.
3. By the impugned order, the assessment was made ex-parte because the petitioner did not utilise the opportunities provided. The discrepancies and grounds on which the assessment order was issued, the dealer’s explanation on merits, and the reasons for not participating in the assessment proceedings are summarised briefly and presented in a table below:
4. Considering the nature of the discrepancies noted, the explanation provided by the assessee and the reason given before this Court for not availing the opportunity, I believe that an opportunity can be granted to the assessee to present their submissions and produce the relevant suppor
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
