Dismissed

S.Ananthakrishnan v. the Commercial Tax Officer

Madras HC9 Dec 2015WP/1741/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court closed two writ petitions challenging recovery demands against specific land. It held that since the supplier of the property settled all arrears under the Samadhan Scheme, the recovery notices no longer survive, thus disposing of the challenges.

What did the court decide?

Writ petitions closed as the recovery notice does not survive due to settlement of arrears; leave to claim deposit refund granted.

S.Ananthakrishnan Vs the Commercial Tax Officer — Property and Title | Madras HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 09.12.2015

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN

¶5

W.P.Nos.1741 and 1742 of 2004

¶6

S. Ananthakrishnan Petitioner in W.P.No.1741 of 2004
S.Govindasamy Chettiar Petitioner in W.P.No.1742 of 2004
Vs
1. The Commercial Tax Officer,
Commercial Tax Office,
Tiruvannamalai 606 602.
2. The Commissioner,
Commercial Taxes,
Ezhilagam,
Chepauk,Chennai-5. Respondents in both Writ Petitions
Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution
of India seeking a writ of Certiorari to call for the records
relating to the demand notice dated 29.12.2002 and the
distraint order dated 29.12.2002 issued and passed by the first
respondent under Section 25 and 8 of the Revenue Recovery Act
with respect to the petitioner's land and building situated in
Survey Nos.160 and 105, Patta Nos.339 and 349 at Vanapuram
Village, Chengam Taluk, Tiruvannamalai District and quash the
same.

¶7

COMMON ORDER

¶8

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.S.Manoharan Sundaram, learned Additional Government Pleader.

¶9

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶10

These Writ Petitions are filed challenging the impugned demand notice dated 29.12.2002 and the distraint order dated 29.12.2002 passed by the first respondent with respect to the petitioners' land and consequently quash the same.

¶11

The challenge in these Writ Petitions is the recovery notice dated 29.12.2002 issued by the 1^st respondent under Sections 25 and 8 of the Revenue Recovery Act in respect of the land in question. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, the arrears of the erst while owner of the property was sought to be recovered from the petitioners, pointing out the charge created by the respondent Department. Challenging the same, the present Writ Petitions have been filed .

¶12

When the matters are taken up for final disposal, learned counsel for the petitioners produced a certificate of settlement of arrears under the Samadhan Scheme, wherein the defaulter, namely, the seller, whose property is sought to be attached by the Department, was in arrears, had settled the entire arrears and obtained the certificate of settlement above referred in Rc.C3/12462/2010 dated 5.8.2011. Since the entire arrears being settled, the recovery notices sought to be quashed in these writ petitions does not survive. Accordingly, the Writ Petitions are closed.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that at the time of admission, this Court has granted interim stay in W.P.M.P.Nos.1890 and 1891 of 2004 on the following terms;

¶14

“ Interim stay on condition the petitioners in each of these writ petitions deposits a sum of Rs.25,000/- each within six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order”

¶15

In view of the above, it is open to the petitioners to make necessary applications for refund of the above said amount and on such applications for refund being made, the same shall be considered and ordered within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.

¶16

sd/Assistant Registrar(Cs-III) /TRUE COPY/ Sub-Assistant Registrar

¶17

msr

¶18

¶19

The Commercial Tax Officer,

¶20

Commercial Tax Office, Tiruvannamalai 606 602.

¶21

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶22

The Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai-5.

¶23

+1 CC to MR. Advocate. SR.NO.66025

¶24

+1 CC to Special Govt.Pleader. SR.NO. 66445

¶25

W.P.Nos.1741 and 1742 of 2004

¶26

CO-MP
JD 19/01/2016

¶27

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

S.Ananthakrishnan v. the Commercial Tax Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Ananthakrishnan v. the Commercial Tax Officer

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

Kanthilal.N.Shah Vs The Authorized Officer, Food

M.Manoharan, Vs The Member Secretary

P.Mahavishnu Vs The Transport Commissioner

S. Kanagaraj Vs the T.N. Industrial Investment

Sushil Kumar Garg Vs the Commercial Tax Officer

Tvl Krishna Traders Vs the Appellate Assistant