Allowed

M/S.Tmt Granites (P) Ltd. v. the Agricultural Income Tax

Kerala HC5 Aug 2011WA/1127/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed an appeal against a Single Judge order. The court held the assessing officer failed to conduct a proper enquiry or hearing and denied the appellant an opportunity to be heard. It vacated the lower court order and remanded the matter for fresh orders.

What did the court decide?

Writ appeal allowed; impugned judgment and registration certificate vacated; fresh orders directed within one month.

M/S.Tmt Granites (P) Ltd. Vs the Agricultural Income Tax — Consumer Protection | Kerala HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 5TH AUGUST 2011 / 14TH SRAVANA 1933

¶5

WA.No. 1127 of 2011()

¶6

--------------------AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.19817/2011

¶7

APPELLANT: PETITIONER

¶8

¶9

M/S.TMT GRANITES (P) LTD., IX/302, MANGALAM DAM (PO), PALAKKAD, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, TOM GEORGE.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.N.MURALEEDHARAN NAIR SMT.K.HYMAVATHY

¶11

RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT:

¶12

¶13

AGRICULTURAL INCOME TAX & COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, ALATHUR-678 541.

¶14

GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. MUHAMMED RAFEEQ

¶15

THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & P.S. GOPINATHAN, JJ.

¶17

DATED THIS, THE 5TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2011.

¶18

J U D G M E N T

¶19

C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J.

¶20

Writ appeal is filed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge relegating the appellant for appellate remedy. We have heard counsel for the appellant and the Government Pleader for the respondent.

¶21

After hearing both sides and on considering Ext.P2, what we notice is the assessing officer was considering an important question as to the items which could be included in the certificate of registration issued under the CST Act , which are items for resale, for use in the manufacturing or processing of goods for sale. The officer should certainly consider the exact nature of activities of the appellant and consider entitlement for the inter-state purchase of items at concessional rate authorised under Rule 13 of the CST (R & T) rules. In fact, the officer is free to conduct inspection to verify for himself the nature of activities, the requirements of items for setting up of the plant, construction and other

¶22

W.A. 1127/2011 2

¶23

purposes, machineries required etc. and the assessee should be heard before passing final orders. If a request for inclusion of any item is not allowed, it is the duty of the officer to inform the appellant the reason why it cannot be allowed and only after giving an opportunity to the appellant to explain his claim, the officer should reject it. The assessing officer did not consider the matter in detail. We notice that the assessing officer has passed the order without a proper enquiry or hearing. Consequently we allow the writ appeal vacating impugned judgment and allow the writ petition by vacating Ext.P2, with direction to the assessing officer to pass fresh orders on the appellant's application by following the procedures as stated above, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶24

C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, (JUDGE).

¶25

P.S. GOPINATHAN, (JUDGE)

¶26

knc/-

M/S.Tmt Granites (P) Ltd. v. the Agricultural Income Tax

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S.Tmt Granites (P) Ltd. v. the Agricultural Income Tax

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jagratha Samithi Vs Joseph

M.Abin Suraj Vs Dr.P.P.Mohammed

The Administrator,Utl and Another Vs Sajitha Beegum and Another

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. and Othe Vs Babu Thomas

Adv.Suresh Babu.P.K. Vs Circle Inspector of Excise and Others

Dr.Sujatha Rani Vs the Federal Bank Ltd.Rep.by the Chief Ma