ASIAN PLYWOOD INDUSTRIES Vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is a dealer under the KVAT and CST Acts. In this writ petition, what is under challenge are Exts.P5 and P5(a) assessment orders passed under the CST Act for the years 2005- 06 and 2006-07. They are also challenging Ext.P6 notice issued under Section 16(10) of the KVAT Act proposing cancellation of KVAT registration. Exts.P3 and P3(a) are two notices issued to the petitioner under the CST Act. In Ext.P3 notice, it was alleged that for the year 2005-06, petitioner reported an interstate sales turn over of Rs.44,66,957.00 and claimed concessional rate of tax at 4%. It is stated that for the said period, they filed C form in support of sale of Rs.17,80,125.00 only and therefore for the balance turn over of Rs.26,86,832.00, they are liable to be assessed at 12.5%. On this basis, petitioner was called upon to file their objections and he was also offered an opportunity of hearing.

(2.) IN Ext.P3(a) notice, it was alleged that for the year 2006-07, petitioner reported an interstate sales turn over of Rs.83,56,602.50.00 and claimed concessional rate of tax at 4%. It is alleged that petitioner had not produced C form in the prescribed time in support of the claim and that on detailed scrutiny, it was revealed that some of the C forms produced by them were bogus. On this basis, they were informed of the proposal to disallow concessional rate and to complete the assessment levying tax at 12.5% on the entire turn over. Here also, they were called upon to file their objections and an opportunity of hearing was also afforded.

(3.) WHEN the writ petition was taken up for hearing, counsel confined his arguments against Ext.P5(a) assessment order alone. In other words, no arguments were addressed challenging Ext.P5 assessment order.