Madras High Court
Silver Cloud Estates vs The Thasildhar on 20 July, 2022
Author: Anita Sumanth
Bench: Anita Sumanth
W.P.No.32028 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 20.07.2022
CORAM
THE HON'BLE Dr.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH
W.P.No.32028 of 2019 and
W.M.P.No.32407 of 2019
1.Silver Cloud Estates,
Represented by its Authorized Signatory, Mr.M. Vasudevan,
No. 1/122 A, Silver cloud Estates,
Gudalur, Nilgiris - 643 211.
2.Barwood Estates,
Represented by its Authorized Signatory Mr.M.Vasudevan,
New Hope Post, Gudalur,
Nilgiris - 643 226. ... Petitioners
-Vs.-
1.The Thasildhar,
Gudalur, Nilgiris District.
2.Agricultural Income Tax Officer,
Gudalur, Nilgiris District. ... Respondents
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records of the first
Respondent relating to the impugned Common Distraint order dated
14.06.2019 and quash the same.
For Petitioners : Ms.S.Amahish Kirthika
For Respondents: Mrs.C.Sangamithirai
Special Government Pleader
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.32028 of 2019
ORDER
The petitioner challenges the distraint order in respect of the demands raised under the Agricultural Income Tax Act, 1962.
2. The case of the revenue i.e., the respondents, is that the assessments have been made in terms of the Tamil Nadu Agricultural Income Tax Act, 1955 (‘Act’) for various periods. The petitioner has, in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, expressly denied the receipt of any such assessment orders.
3. Thus, and one of the primary grounds raised to assail the impugned recovery proceedings is that any coercive recovery must be preceded by framing of assessment orders and due service of such orders upon the petitioner, and this procedure has not been followed in the present case.
4. However, the compilation of documents accompanying the writ affidavit runs counter to the above submission as some orders of assessment have indeed been served upon the petitioners, either the first petitioner or the second.
5. This matter has been listed for hearing between 29.11.2019 and today (20.07.2022). On 27.06.2022 and 06.07.2022, the matter has been 2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.32028 of 2019 adjourned to enable the parties to circulate material/records in support of their submissions. The orders passed on 27.06.2022 and 06.07.2022 are extracted below:
'27.06.2022- Registry is directed to print the name of Mrs.C.Sanghamithirai, learned Special Government Pleader for the R1.
2. Learned Special Government Pleader circulates affidavit filed by R1. However, it is undated and is not in proper form. The affidavit it returned.
3. Let the same be filed prior to 05.07.2022 with a copy served upon the petitioner as a last chance.
4. List on 06.07.2022.' '06.07.2022- Let the records be produced to establish service of assessment order upon the petitioners. Additionally, let cheque leaf bearing No.672311, dated 11.11.2019 for an amount of Rs.14,00,000/- be produced, since according to the counter of the respondents, the same was received, but not deposited on account of the plea of insufficient funds in the petitioners bank account.
2.List on 20.07.2022.'
6. On 20.07.2022, specific and pointed queries have been put both to the learned Special Government Pleader as well as the learned counsel for the petitioners on the aspect of (i) which are the orders served upon the petitioners and (ii) whether the statement in paragraph 8 of counter dated 10.12.2020 to the effect that an amount of Rs.14,00,000/- has been remitted is correct.
7. It had also been suggested and pointed out that no rejoinder had been filed to the aforesaid averments. That apart, the petitioners’ response 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.32028 of 2019 had been sought to the statement in counter to the effect that cheque dated No.672311 dated 11.11.2019 for a sum of Rs.14 lakhs had been handed over by the petitioners to the respondents, but had been dishonoured. The petitioners appear to have also orally undertaken that they will pay the remaining amounts shortly, but no payments have been forthcoming thereafter.
8. Neither of the learned counsel are in a position to put forth any satisfactory response to the queries raised or clarify any of the points put forth by the Court. Though the respondents had been directed to produce the proof of service of all assessment orders, the same have not been produced thus far.
9.The petitioners have placed on record documents at serial number (1) to (12) being partition deeds and learned counsel is also unable to explain the reason for the same. Bearing in mind the fact that I have received no assistance from either counsel before me, this writ petition is disposed in the following manner:-
(i) the petitioners are granted liberty to, if they so desire, make a representation to the respondents setting out their grievances as against the impugned distraint order.4/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.32028 of 2019
(ii) Such representation shall be entertained only if filed within a period of four weeks from date of receipt of this order.
(iii) If a representation is received as per point (i) above, the respondent will issue notice to the petitioners, hear them and pass orders thereupon expeditiously and within a period of four weeks from date of filing of the representation.
(iv) The continuance or otherwise of the order of distraint shall be subject to the events as enumerated above.
(v) The time frames as set out above shall be scrupulously adhered to by both parties.
10. This writ petition stands disposed as above. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
20.07.2022 vs/nsa Speaking order Index: Yes To
1.The Thasildhar, Gudalur, Nilgiris District.
2.Agricultural Income Tax Officer, Gudalur, Nilgiris District.
5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.32028 of 2019 Dr.ANITA SUMANTH.J., vs/nsa W.P.No.32028 of 2019 and W.M.P.No.32407 of 2019 20.07.2022 6/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis