Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

K.Malaisamy Natarajan vs The Joint Commissioner on 8 February, 2019

Author: Abdul Quddhose

Bench: Abdul Quddhose

                                                            1

                          BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                                DATED: 08.02.2019

                                                      CORAM:

                            THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE

                                            W.P.(MD)No.789 of 2019

                      K.Malaisamy Natarajan                               ... Petitioner
                                                          -Vs-
                      1.The Joint Commissioner, (S.T.),
                          Madurai Division, Madurai.


                      2.The Assistant Commercial Tax Officer-II,
                          O/o. The Commercial Tax Office,
                          Villupuram


                      3.The Deputy Commissioner,
                          Tax Officer, (EMF),
                          Roving Squad,
                          Villupuram.                                     ... Respondents
                      (R3 is suo motu impleaded vide Court order dated 01.02.2019)


                      PRAYER:      Writ   Petition   is   filed   under   Article   226    of   the
                      Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of
                      Mandamus, directing the second respondent to refund a sum of
                      Rs.2,52,000/- to the petitioner as per the order of the first
                      respondent dated 13.10.2017 made in R.P.52 of 2014 by allowing
                      the petitioner's representation dated 10.05.2018.



http://www.judis.nic.in
                                                        2

                               For Petitioner    : Mr.R.Suriyanarayanan
                               For Respondents : Mr.D.Muruganantham,
                                                   Additional Government Pleader.
                                                      ORDER

The instant writ petition has been filed for a Writ of Mandamus, directing the second respondent to refund a sum of Rs.2,52,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs and Fifty Two Thousand Only) to the petitioner as per the order of the first respondent dated 13.10.2017 made in R.P.No.52 of 2014 by allowing the petitioner's representation dated 10.05.2018.

2.It is the case of the petitioner that he had purchased one Scrap Tata 955 Crane and he brought the same from Chennai to Madurai. During the transit, the vehicle was intercepted by the Roving Squad, Villupuram, stating that the material was transported by paying tax at 5% instead of 14.5%. Under protest, the difference in tax as demanded by Roving Squad, Villupuram was paid by the petitioner and a receipt was also issued by them to the petitioner for the said amount. Thereafter, the petitioner challenged the excess payment of tax by filing revision in R.P.No.52 of 2014 before the first respondent, who passed an order in favour of the petitioner on 13.10.2017 accepting the plea of the petitioner http://www.judis.nic.in 3 that compounding fee of Rs.2,52,000/- was wrongly collected by the Roving Squad, villupuram. Thereafter, the petitioner gave a representation to the second respondent, calling upon him to refund the excess amount of Rs.2,52,000/- paid by the petitioner and to comply with the order dated 13.10.2017 passed by the first respondent.

3.According to the petitioner, despite giving a representation, till date the second respondent has not refunded the excess amount of Rs.2,52,000/- collected by way of tax by the Roving Squad, Villupuram.

4.Heard Mr.R.Suriyanarayanan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.D.Muruganantham, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

5.Admittedly, the order passed by the first respondent dated 13.10.2017 in R.P.No.52 of 2014 has now become final and binding on the respondents.

http://www.judis.nic.in 4

6.Admittedly, even though the representation was given by the petitioner as early as on 10.05.2018, till date the second respondent has not considered the representation made by the petitioner for refund of the excess compounding fee of Rs.2,50,000/- paid by him. In such circumstances, the petitioner is now entitled to obtain the refundable sum of Rs.2,50,000/- from the second respondent, as it is an undisputed fact that the said amount is an excess payment collected by the Roving Squad, Villupuram.

7.In the result, the second respondent is directed to refund the sum of Rs.2,52,000/- to the petitioner, which was wrongfully collected by the Roving Squad, Villupuram without authority under law, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

8.Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.




                                                                             08.02.2019

                      Index     : Yes/No
                      Internet : Yes/No

                      Myr



http://www.judis.nic.in
                                                          5



                      To

                      1.The Joint Commissioner, (S.T.),
                          Madurai Division, Madurai.


2.The Assistant Commercial Tax Officer-II, O/o. The Commercial Tax Office, Villupuram

3.The Deputy Commissioner, Tax Officer, (EMF), Roving Squad, Villupuram.

http://www.judis.nic.in 6 ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.

Myr W.P.(MD)No.789 of 2019 08.02.2019 http://www.judis.nic.in