Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.21 seconds)
M/S.Amirtha Distributors vs The Assistant Commissioner (St) (Fac) on 12 April, 2018 cites

Madras Granites (P) Ltd. vs Commercial Tax Officer And Anr. on 30 October, 2002

6. A Division Bench of this Court in the case of Madras Granites (P) Ltd vs. Commercial Tax Officer reported in 146 STC 642 has held that the Quasi Judicial Authority, while exercising his quasi-judicial function for completing the assessment, is not bound by the instructions of the higher authorities. He has to independently apply his mind in taking the decision. But, in the instant case, the respondent has passed the impugned assessment orders simply based upon the report of the Enforcement Wing Officers and without providing required documents to the petitioner, to disprove the allegations. Moreover, the respondent, without recording any reason, has simply overruled the objections raised by the petitioner, which is not sustainable in law.
Madras High Court Cites 0 - Cited by 60 - K R Pandian - Full Document

Tvl.Src Projects Private Limited vs The Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes on 8 September, 2008

7. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would rely on the Judgment of this Court in the case of Tvl.SRC Projects Private Limited vs. the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, in W.A.Nos.893 and 894 of 2008, dated 08.09.2008, wherein it was categorically held that an opportunity of personal hearing is mandatory before passing the revised assessment order for a dealer to go before the authority and present his records and documents, so as to enable the dealer to disprove the allegations in such cases, which is very much essential, in compliance with the principles of natural justice. Further, when a specific request is made, it is mandatory on the part of the Quasi Judicial Authority to comply with the principles of natural justice, which has been repeatedly reiterated by way of catena of decisions.
Madras High Court Cites 18 - Cited by 89 - F M Kalifulla - Full Document

M/S.Sri Kumaran Trading Company vs The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer on 31 March, 2005

8. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would rely on the judgments of this Court in the case of Sri Kumaran Trading Company vs. Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Chennai, reported in [2017] 105 VST 306 (Mad) and in the cases of M/s.APT Leather vs. The Commercial Tax Officer, Vellore District reported in 48 GSTR 89 and M/s.Trisul Overseas vs. The Assistant Commissioner, Ranipet reported in 48 GSTR 129, etc..
Madras High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 2 - Full Document

Union Leather Company vs Joint Commercial Tax Officer, Periamet ... on 4 July, 1985

8. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would rely on the judgments of this Court in the case of Sri Kumaran Trading Company vs. Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Chennai, reported in [2017] 105 VST 306 (Mad) and in the cases of M/s.APT Leather vs. The Commercial Tax Officer, Vellore District reported in 48 GSTR 89 and M/s.Trisul Overseas vs. The Assistant Commissioner, Ranipet reported in 48 GSTR 129, etc..
Madras High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 2 - Full Document
1