Judgment · High Court
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 66. In such circumstances, the impugned notices issued by the respondent are set aside. However, it is made clear that it would beopen to the respondent to pass original assessment orders, in respect of the assessment years 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 and 2009-10, under Section 22…
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 27.2.2012CORAMTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN W.P.No.2630 of 2012, W.P.No.2631 of 2012, W.P.No.2632 of2012 and W.P.No.2633 of 2012 M/S.MALLADI DRUGS & PHARMACEUTICALS LTD, NO.9 G.S.T. ROAD ST. THOMAS MOUNT, CHENNAI-16 REP. BY ITS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR S.SHREYA[ PETITIONER IN ALL THE WRIT PETITIONS] Vs THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (CT) GUINDY ASSESSMENT CIRCLE NO.46, GREENWAYS ROAD CHENNAI-28. [ RESPONDENT IN ALL THEWRIT PETITIONS]W.P.No.2630 of 2012:This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitutionof India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records of the respondent in TIN No.33500902741/2006-07 dated23.01.2012 and quash the same.W.P.No.2631 of 2012:This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitutionof India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records of the respondent in TIN No.33500902741/2007-08 dated23.01.2012 and quash the same.W.P.No.2632 of 2012:This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitutionof India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records of the respondent in TIN No.33500902741/2008-09 dated23.01.2012 and quash the same. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ W.P.No.2633 of 2012:This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitutionof India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records of the respondent in TIN No.33500902741/2009-10 dated23.01.2012 and quash the same. For petitioner : Mr.K.J.Chandran in all the writ petitions: For respondent : Mr.A.R.Jayaprathapin all the writ Government Advocate (T) petitions: C O M M O N
O R D E RHeard the learned counsels appearing for both sides.
Since, the issues involved in all the writ petitions are similar in nature, they have been taken up together and a common order is being passed.
It has been stated that the petitioner had filed the returns for the assessment years 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 and 2009-10,respectively. No assessment order had been passed by the assessing authority, based on the returns filed by the petitioner, under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006. Without passing the final orders of assessment, as contemplated under the relevant provisions of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, the respondent had madea revision of assessment, for which he has issued the impugned notices. The impugned notices issued by the respondents are contrary to the relevant provisions of law and they are also contrary to the circulars issued by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Chennai.
It has been further stated that Section 22 of the Tamil NaduValue Added Tax Act, 2006, requires the assessing authority to complete the assessment, as per the returns filed by the dealer. Thereafter, if any mistake is found to have been made, he is entitled to reopen the assessments already made and to pass appropriate orders, thereon. However, in the cases before the Court, the respondent had issued the impugned notices, for the assessment years2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 and 2009-10, respectively, for revision of assessments, without passing the original assessment orders. As such, the impugned notices issued by the respondent are arbitrary and illegal and therefore, they are liable to be set aside. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
The contentions raised on behalf of the petitioner had not been refuted by the learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent.
In such circumstances, the impugned notices issued by the respondent are set aside. However, it is made clear that it would beopen to the respondent to pass original assessment orders, in respect of the assessment years 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 and 2009-10, under Section 22 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, based on thereturns filed by the petitioner. Thereafter, it would be open to the respondent to re-assess the tax due from the petitioner, after making such enquiries, as he may consider to be appropriate and necessary, in accordance with the procedures prescribed, under Section 27 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006. The writ petitions are ordered accordingly. No costs. ConnectedM.P.Nos.1, 1, 1 and 1 of 2012 are closed. Sd/-Asst. Registrar./true copy/Sub Asst. Registrar.lanTo: THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (CT) GUINDY ASSESSMENT CIRCLE NO.46, GREENWAYS ROAD CHENNAI-28.+ 1 CC To Mr.K.J.Chandran Advocate SR NO.13369+ 1 CC to the Government Pleader (T) SR NO 13875W.P.No.2630 of 2012, W.P.No.2631 of 2012W.P.No.2632 of 2012 and W.P.No.2633 of 2012VS(CO)ABH/22.03.2012
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.