KAESAV SAW MILL Vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN all these writ petitions, the assessee is one and the same, viz., M/s. Kaesav Saw Mill and the challenge is to the revision of assessment orders for the assessment years 2007 -08 to 2010 -2011.

(2.) SINCE the facts are identical, it would suffice to refer to the averments made in W.P.(MD)No.892 of 2014. The petitioner is a dealer in timber and assessee on the files of the first respondent. They filed the returns under Section 22(2) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 (TNVAT Act) for the year 2007 -08. Similar returns were filed for the other assessment years which were accepted and orders were passed. Subsequently, the first respondent issued notice under Section 27(2) of the Act proposing to revise the claim of Input Tax Credit and also proposing levy of penalty under Section 27(2)(iii) of the Act. It was alleged that an inspection was conducted in the place of business of the assessee and that the assessee had availed larger claim of Input Tax Credit, which were not entitled to and records were furnished regarding the actual movement of purchase bills such as lorry way bill, lorry receipt etc. Further, the Inspecting Officers observed that maximum purchases as well as their sales have been made in favour of four or five concerns and they were of the view that those were bogus purchases. It was further stated that though records were called for, the assessee has not produced the same and therefore, the proposal was made to revise the Input Tax Credit claim. Similar proposals were made in respect of other assessment years. The assessee submitted their reply to the revision notice dated 13.03.2013 stating as follows:

(3.) HEARD the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.