M/s.Naraiuran Controls (India) P Limited v. The Commercial Tax Officer
Case at a glance
- Bench
- M JAICHANDRENWRIT
Outcome
Dismissed
Therefore, thisWrit Petition stands dismissed
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 55. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the petitioner, as well as the respondents and on a perusal of the records available, it is found that an appellate remedy is available to the petitioner to challenge the…
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATE: 05.10.2012CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDRENWrit Petition No.18952 of 2012andM.P.No.1 of 2012M/s.Naraiuran Controls (India) P Limited, Rep by its Managing Director Mr.N.Ravi ShankarNo.41, Krishnapuram Road, Choolaimedu, Chennai-600 094... Petitioner. VersusThe Commercial Tax Officer, Vadapalani II Assessment Circle, No.621, Anna Salai, SIRE Mansion, Chennai-600 006... Respondent. Prayer: Petition filed seeking for a writ of CertiorarifiedMandamus, to call for the records of the respondent in TIN33291483256/2008-09, quash the impugned revised order dated29/03/12 and further direct the respondent to pass orders afresh after considering the objections enclosed in the Annexures filed by the petitioner and thereafter pass orders in accordance with law. For Petitioner : Mr.V.SundareswaranFor Respondent : Mr.S.Kanmani Annamalai Government Advocate (Taxes)
O R D E RHeard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent.
The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had submitted that the respondent, having passed the assessment order, dated 15.11.2010,accepting the returns filed by the petitioner, under Section 22(2) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added TaxAct, 2006, had issued a notice for revision of assessment on the same day, i.e. on 15.11.2010. The respondent does not have any authority to issue such a notice for revision of assessment, on the same day, after having passed an order, under Section 22(2) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006.
The learned counsel for the petitioner had also submitted https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ that the objections filed by the petitioner, on 27.1.2011, relating to the reversal of input tax credit on sales made by the petitioner to Export Oriented Units and the sales made to Special EconomicZones and the objections raised by the petitioner, with regard to the dis-allowance of transit sales exemptions had not been considered by the respondent, while passing the impugned order, dated 29.3.2012. Further, the respondent had not given any opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner before passing the said order. Therefore, the impugned order of the respondent, dated 29.3.2012, is liable to be set aside.
Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent had submitted that all the objections raised by the petitioner had been considered by the respondent, while passing the impugned order, dated 29.3.2012. Further, the petitioner has an alternative remedy, by way of an appeal, to challenge the impugned order of the respondent, dated 29.3.2012, under Section 51 of the Tamil NaduValue Added Tax Act, 2006. Therefore, the present Writ Petitionfiled by the petitioner before this Court, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is liable to be dismissed, as not maintainable.
Operative part
In view of the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the petitioner, as well as the respondents and on a perusal of the records available, it is found that an appellate remedy is available to the petitioner to challenge the impugned order of the respondent, dated 29.3.2012, by way of an appeal, as provided under Section 51 of the Tamil Nadu Value AddedTax Act, 2006. As such the present writ petition, filed by the petitioner before this Court, is not maintainable. Therefore, this Writ Petition stands dismissed. However, it would be open to the petitioner to file an appeal before the appropriate authority, asper Section 51 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax, 2006, within aperiod of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such appeal being filed, the appellate authority may dispose of the same, on merits and in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible. No costs. Consequently, connectedMiscellaneous Petition is closed. Sd/ Asst. Registrar(Records) /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrararr https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ ToThe Commercial Tax Officer, Vadapalani II Assessment Circle, No.621, Anna Salai, SIRE Mansion, Chennai-600 006.+1cc to Mr.V.Sundareswaran, Advocate Sr 62659PPA(CO)km/8.10Writ Petition No.18952 of 2012
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Therefore, thisWrit Petition stands dismissed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
theTamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 — s. 22(2); Tamil NaduValue Added Tax Act, 2006 — s. 51; Constitution of India — art. 226; Tamil Nadu Value AddedTax Act, 2006 — s. 51.
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.