Disposed

M/s.S.P.S.Cement Agency v. The Assistant Commissioner

Madras HC10 Dec 2015WP/38834/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging a penalty and disallowance of input tax credit. Instead of deciding on merits, the court granted the petitioner time to file an appeal before the Appellate Authority, instructing the authority to entertain it without raising limitation.

What did the court decide?

Permission granted to the petitioner to file an appeal before the Appellate Authority within three weeks. The Appellate Authority is directed to entertain the appeal while ignoring the limitation peri

M/s.S.P.S.Cement Agency Vs The Assistant Commissioner — GST and Indirect Tax | Madras HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 10.12.2015

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN

¶5

M/s.S.P.S.Cement Agency,

¶6

represented by its Proprietor-P.Subramaniam, R.S.631/B, Pidari Koil Street, Trichy Main Road, Sirunesalur, Vridhachalam 606 001, Cuddalore District. .. Petitioner

¶7

The Assistant Commissioner (CT) (FAC), Vridachalam, Cuddalore District .. Respondent

¶8

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of Certiorari to call for the records on the file of the respondent in its impugned proceedings made in TIN.33114426044/2013-2014 dated 27.08.2014 and quash the same.

¶9

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.S.Kanmani Annamalai, learned Additional Government Pleader, who took notice for the respondent and with their consent, the main writ petition itself is taken up for disposal.

¶10

This writ petition is filed challenging the impugned proceedings passed by the respondent dated 27.08.2014, made in TIN.33114426044/2013-2014.

¶11

The petitioner is a dealer in Cement and a registered dealer on the files of respondent. For the assessment year 20132014, the petitioner filed monthly returns reporting taxable turnover as Rs.15,66,575/- and Rs.15,38,407/- respectively and claimed input tax credit on the purchase turnover. On verification of purchase details, the respondent, in its proceedings TIN.33114426044/2013-2014, dated 27.8.2014 passed

¶12

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

¶13

best judgment order under section 22(4) by disallowing the claim of ITC, stating that the petitioner has suppressed purchase turnovers and as such, the returns filed have been treated as incomplete and incorrect and thereby levied penalty under Section 22(5) of the Act. Consequent to the impugned proceedings a Demand Notice was also issued by the respondent on 9.12.2014. Aggrieved over the said order, this Writ Petition came to be filed.

¶14

When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is willing to go before the Appellate Authority challenging the impugned order in this Writ Petition and sufficient time may be granted to the petitioner for filing the appeal.

¶15

In view of the same, this writ petition is disposed of by permitting the petitioner to file an appeal within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such filing, the appellate authority shall entertain the same and pass appropriate orders, on merits and in accordance with law, without raising the issue of limitation. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶16

Sd/Assistant Registrar(CS VII) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar msr To

¶17

The Assistant Commissioner (CT) (FAC), Vridachalam, Cuddalore District

¶18

W.P.No.38834 of 2015

¶19

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

M/s.S.P.S.Cement Agency v. The Assistant Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s.S.P.S.Cement Agency v. The Assistant Commissioner

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

M/S. Indian Steel & Allied Vs the Deputy Commercial Tax

N.Viswanathan Vs Deputy Commecial Tax Officer

Sree Ambika Press Vs State of Tamil Nadu, Rep by

M/s.Arihant Foundations & Vs The Assistant Commissioner

M/s.Kamachi Sponge and Power Vs Customs, Excise and Service

M/s.Space Wood Office Vs Deputy Commercial Tax