Madras High Court
M/S.Jain Irrigation Systems Ltd vs The Commercial Tax Officer on 3 December, 2012
Author: R.Sudhakar
Bench: R.Sudhakar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 3.12.2012 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.SUDHAKAR W.P.No.32019 of 2012 and M.P.Nos.1 and 2 of 2012 M/s.Jain Irrigation Systems Ltd., represented by its Sr.Vice President S.N.Swamy, No.35A, II Cross Street, West CIT Nagar, Chennai 600 035, (presently at Old No.19, New No.7, South Mada Street, Srinagar Colony, Saidapet, Chennai-600 015). .. Petitioner Vs. The Commercial Tax Officer, T.Nagar (South) Assessment Circle, Greenways Road, Chennai-600 028. .. Respondent Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the impugned proceedings of the respondent in TNGST/1542202/2006-07 dated 15.10.2012, quash the same as illegal and violative of Section 87-A of the TNVAT Act, 2006. For Petitioner : Mrs.R.Hemalatha For Respondent : Mr.A.R.Jayaprathap Government Advocate (Tax) ----- O R D E R
This writ petition has been filed praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the impugned proceedings of the respondent in TNGST/1542202/2006-07 dated 15.10.2012, quash the same as illegal and violative of Section 87-A of the TNVAT Act, 2006.
2. Mr.A.R.Jayaprathap, learned Government Advocate (Tax) takes notice for the respondent. By consent, the Writ Petition is taken up for disposal.
3. The assessment relates to the period 2006-07 under the provisions of TNGST Act, 1957 for the period April 2006 to December, 2006. Petitioner filed the returns as required under Section 87-A of Tamil Nadu VAT Act, 2006 by following the Rule 18 of the TNGST Rules. That return was not accepted. Respondent issued notice on 15.12.2008 proposing to reject the turnover reported by the petitioner with a direction to the dealer/petitioner to file objection, if any along with documentary evidence. A reminder notice was issued on 31.3.2009. Petitioner submitted documents and clarification in a form of objection on 16.4.2009 and that has been acknowledged by the authority. However, in the order dated 15.10.2012 which is under challenge, the authority has failed to take into consideration the objection stating that the petitioner/assessee has not filed any objections till date and therefore, he is finalising the proposal as such.
4. Petitioner challenges the impugned order only on the limited plea that an objection along with documents was submitted on 16.4.2009 and the same has been acknowledged. But, the authority kept the matter pending for more than 3 years and passed the impugned orders unmindful of the objections, without application of mind and without following the principles of natural justice.
5. Considering the above factum of submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Advocate states that if the court is inclined to set aside the impugned order, liberty may be given to the authority to pass fresh orders after hearing the petitioner on the objection and records that were submitted already.
6. Considering the above submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate, the impugned order is set aside. The respondent is directed to reconsider and pass fresh order after hearing the petitioner on the objection and records that were submitted already. Petitioner is also given liberty to furnish copy of the same at the time of personal hearing.
7. The writ petition is allowed by way of remand as above. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
ts To The Commercial Tax Officer, T.Nagar (South) Assessment Circle, Greenways Road, Chennai 600 028