Remanded

Tvl.Eswari Agencies v. The Commercial Tax Officer

Madras HC24 Mar 2016WP/10975/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court set aside an impugned commercial tax order dated 17.06.2015 passed without prior notice to the petitioner, violating natural justice. The Court directed the respondent to send a proper notice and decide the matter afresh after affording a personal hearing.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order quashed. Petitioner directed to treat order as notice and file reply within two weeks. Matter remanded for fresh proceedings after personal hearing.

Tvl.Eswari Agencies Vs The Commercial… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 24.03.2016

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY

¶5

W.P.No.10975 of 2016 and W.M.P.No.9566 of 2016

¶6

Tvl.Eswari Agencies

¶7

rep by its Proprietrix Murugeswari No.2, LGN Road, Chennai – 600 002 now at No.19/9, Dhandavarayan Street, Royapettah, Chennai – 600 014.

¶8

... Petitioner

¶9

Vs.

¶10

The Commercial Tax Officer, Tiruvellikeni Assessment Circle, No.48, Pasumpon Muthuramalinga Devar Salai, Chennai – 600 028. ... Respondent

¶11

Petition filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of certiorari to call for the records on the file of the respondent in TIN No.:33760681050/2011-12 dated 17.06.2015 and quash the same as being without jurisdiction and authority of law and contrary to the principles of natural justice.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Senniappan For Respondents : Mr.S.Kanmani Annamalai, Additional Government Pleader (Tax)

¶13

O R D E R

¶14

The petitioner has filed the above Writ Petition to issue a writ of certiorari to call for the records on the file of the respondent in TIN No.:33760681050/2011-12 dated 17.06.2015 and to quash the same.

¶15

2.It is the case of the petitioner that inspite of the respondent mentioning the present address of the petitioner in the impugned order dated 17.06.2015, in the very same order, he has stated that the dealers have not informed their present address to the Department, hence, the notice is sent to them, which was returned by the Postal Authorities with an endorsement as “insufficient address”.

¶16

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

¶17

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that since no notice was received by the petitioner, they had no opportunity to file their objections and contest the matter.

¶18

4.Mr.S.Kanmani Annamalai, learned Additional Government Pleader (Tax) taking notice for the respondent submitted that since notices were sent to the petitioner's old address, the same could not be served on the petitioner, therefore, in the interest of justice, an opportunity may be given to the petitioner to give their objections and the respondent may be directed to decide the matter afresh.

¶19

5.In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, since the petitioner had not been served with notice prior to the passing of the impugned order, the same is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 17.06.2015 is set aside. The petitioner is directed to treat the impugned order as notice and send their reply within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The respondent is directed to consider the objections to be filed by the petitioner and decide the matter afresh, after affording due opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner.

¶20

6.With these observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶21

-s/dAssistant Registrar True Copy Sub-Assistant Registrar To The Commercial Tax Officer, Tiruvellikeni Assessment Circle, No.48, Pasumpon Muthuramalinga Devar Salai, Chennai – 600 028.

¶22

+1 cc to the Special Government Pleader (Taxes) sr.18859 +1 cc to Mr.R.Senniappan Advocate sr.18907

¶23

W.P.No.10975 of 2016 and W.M.P.No.9566 of 2016

¶24

aa29/03/2016

¶25

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

Tvl.Eswari Agencies v. The Commercial Tax Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tvl.Eswari Agencies 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/s.Pure Chemicals Co. Vs The Commissioner of Commercial

D.Mohamad Ali, Vs The Transport Commissioner

K.James Antonyraj, Vs The Managing Director

M/s.Sri Karunya Hosiery Vs The Assistant Commissioner(Ct)

S.Govindaraj, Vs The Tamilnadu State Marketing

S.v.Thiyagarajan, Vs The Government of Tamilnadu