✦ Madras High Court

M/s.Divyar Rossila Prints IndiaPrivate Limited v. The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer,Palladam

Writ Petition No. 17017 of 2006

Case at a glance

Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 21.03.2011C O R A MThe Honourable Mr. Justice M.JAICHANDRENWrit Petition No.17017 of 2006M/s.Divyar Rossila Prints IndiaPrivate Limited, Rep. By its Managing Director,S.Nagarajan, No.39, Palaniappa Nagar, Kongunagar Extension, Ramanathapuram, Coimbatore – 641 045.... PetitionerVersusThe Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Palladam. ... RespondentPrayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of Indiato issue a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records onthe file of the respondent in his B-6 notice issued to the BranchManager, UTI Bank, Coimbatore attaching the Bank account of thepetitioner in TNGST No.6242640/2005-2006 dated 05.04.2006 and quashthe same and direct the respondent herein to lift the bank attachment. For Petitioner: Mrs.R.HemalathaFor Respondent : Mr.R.Mahadevan Additional Government Pleader(T)ORDERHeard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and thelearned Additional Government Pleader (T) appearing on behalf of therespondent.2. The main contention of the learned counsel appearing on behalfof the petitioner is that the impugned demand notice, dated02.02.2006, had been issued without a pre-assessment notice andwithout an assessement order being issued3. At this stage of the hearing of the writ petition, the learnedAdditional Government Pleader (Tax) appearing on behalf of therespondent had submitted that the respondent has passed anassessement order, on 04.09.2006, stating that there is no liabilityon the petitioner, in respect of the demand of sales tax, under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

3.

In such circumstances, since, no further orders are necessary, the writ petition stands closed. No costs. Sd/ Asst. Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrarcse ToThe Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Palladam.+ 1 cc to Mr.R. Hemalatha, Advocate SR.20875+ 1 cc to Government Pleader Sr.20875Writ Petition No.17017 of 2006NM(CO)Eu 11.4.11

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.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Madras High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. Writ Petition No. 17017 of 2006). ← Search more judgments