Madras High Court
M/S.Hindustan Dorr-Oliver Ltd vs The Joint Commissioner Of Commercial on 9 August, 2016
Author: T.S.Sivagnanam
Bench: T.S.Sivagnanam
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 09.08.2016
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM
W.P.Nos.21793 to 21795 of 2005
W.P.No.21793/2005
M/s.Hindustan Dorr-Oliver Ltd.,
No.121, Rukmani Lakshmipathi Road
Egmore, Chennai 600 008. .. Petitioner
..Vs..
1.The Joint Commissioner of Commercial
Taxes (Revision Petition),
Chepauk
Chennai 600 005.
2.The Deputy Commissioner (CT)
Chennai (Central) Division
Chennai 600 006.
3.The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer
Egmore I Assessment Circle. .. Respondents
Prayer
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records of the first respondent in his proceedings in R.P.No.JJ1/183/99, quash the order dated 22.03.05 made therein for the assessment year 1993-94.
W.P.No.21794/2005
M/s.Hindustan Dorr-Oliver Ltd.,
No.121, Rukmani Lakshmipathi Road
Egmore, Chennai 600 008. .. Petitioner
..Vs..
1.The Joint Commissioner of Commercial
Taxes (Revision Petition),
Chepauk
Chennai 600 005.
2.The Deputy Commissioner (CT)
Chennai (Central) Division
Chennai 600 006.
3.The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer
Egmore I Assessment Circle. .. Respondents
Prayer
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records of the first respondent in his proceedings in R.P.No.JJ1/185/99 and quash the order dated 22.03.2005 made therein for the assessment year 1994-95.
W.P.No.21795/2005
M/s.Hindustan Dorr-Oliver Ltd.,
No.121, Rukmani Lakshmipathi Road
Egmore, Chennai 600 008. .. Petitioner
..Vs..
1.The Joint Commissioner of Commercial
Taxes (Revision Petition),
Chepauk
Chennai 600 005.
2.The Deputy Commissioner (CT)
Chennai (Central) Division
Chennai 600 006.
3.The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer
Egmore I Assessment Circle. .. Respondents
Prayer
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records of the first respondent in R.P.No.JJ1/155/04, quash the order dated 22.03.05 made therein for the assessment year 1996-97.
For Petitioner
in all WPs : Mr.P.V.Sudakar
For Respondents
in all WPs : Mr.S.Kanmani Annamalai, A.G.P.,
COMMON ORDER
Heard Mr.P.V.Sudakar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.S.Kanmani Annamalai, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.
2.The petitioner who is a registered dealer on the file of the third respondent under the erstwhile Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act [TNGST Act] has filed these writ petitions challenging the order dated 22.03.2005, which are the orders passed by the revisional authority, confirming the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner [CT Chennai Central Division], namely the first revisional authority, dated 22.04.1999 and 02.04.2004 confirming the order passed by the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Egmore - I Assessment circle, dated 09.06.1997 and 25.05.2001.
3.By virtue of the impugned orders, the petitioner has been directed to pay interest under Section 24(3) of the TNGST Act. In fact, the impugned orders are a fall out of the assessment orders for the relevant years, which were framed against the petitioner.
4.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the assessment orders for the relevant years were challenged by the petitioner by filing W.P.Nos.6351 to 6353 of 2005 and those writ petitions were allowed by an order dated 03.08.2016 and the matter has been remitted to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration. The operative portion of the said order is usefully extracted here under:
2. The petitioner has filed these writ petitions to quash the orders of the assessment for three assessment years, namely, 1993-1994, 1994-1995 and 1996-1997 on the ground that the respondent, without awaiting orders to be passed by the appellate authority with regard to assessment years 1989-90 and 1990-91, has proceeded to complete the assessment for the above referred years. This was a situation when the petitioner filed the writ petition. Subsequently, the appeals filed by the petitioner were allowed and the revenue's appeal before this Court by way of tax case revision was dismissed by the Hon'ble Division Bench in State of Tamil Nadu v. Hindustan Dorr Oliver Limited ([2010] 27 VST 397 (Mad)].
3. In the light of th above, the impugned assessment proceedings necessarily have to be set aside and the same has to be redone in the light of the decision of the Hon'ble division Bench confirming order passed by the Tribunal in the assessee's own case for other assessment years.
4. Accordingly, the writ petitions are allowed and the impugned assessment proceedings are set aside and the matter is remanded back to the respondent to redo the assessment in accordance with the decision in Hindustan Dorr Oliver Limited (cited supra). No Costs.
5.In the light of the orders passed in the writ petitions challenging the assessment orders, the impugned orders in these writ petitions also calls for interference. Accordingly, these writ petitions are allowed and the impugned orders are set aside and the matter is remitted to the third respondent for fresh consideration along with the assessment proceedings. No costs.
09.08.2016 pgp T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J pgp To
1.The Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Revision Petition), Chepauk Chennai 600 005.
2.The Deputy Commissioner (CT) Chennai (Central) Division Chennai 600 006.
3.The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer Egmore I Assessment Circle.
W.P.Nos.21793 to 21795 of 2005 Dated : 09.08.2016