Allowed

M/s.Venu Residency, v. The Joint Commissioner

Madras HC20 Apr 2016WP/13795/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Madras disposed of a writ petition where the petitioner questioned the collection of a cheque without an assessment order. The court set aside the notice and directed the respondents to return the cheque within three days due to the lack of an assessment order.

What did the court decide?

Impugned notice dated 19.11.2015 set aside; respondents directed to return cheque No. 37396847 for Rs. 3,86,220/- within three days.

M/s.Venu Residency, Vs The Joint Commissioner — Property and Title | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 20.04.2016

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY

¶5

W.P.No.13795 of 2016 & W.M.P.No.12109 of 2016

¶6

M/s.Venu Residency Rep by its Partner S.Venugopal No.431/ 83, Periyar Colony Avinashi Road Tirupur – 641 603 .. Petitioner v. 1 The Joint Commissioner (CT) (Enforcement Wing) Coimbatore 2 The Assistant Commissioner (CT) Rural Assessment Circle Tirupur .. Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records on the files of the 2nd respondent in TIN. No.33552392197/2015-16 dated 19.11.2015 and quash the same as being without jurisdiction and authority of law and further directing the 1^st and 2^nd respondents to arrange to return back cheque No.37396847, dated 21.9.2015 for a value of Rs.3,86,220/issued by Vijaya Bank, Tirupur Branch collected by the 1st respondent on the spot on 21.9.2015 as being contrary to the principle laid down by this Court in the judgment reported in (1992) 87 STC 513 (Hotel) Blue Nile Vs. State of Tamil Nadu & Others).

¶7

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Senniappan For Respondent : Mr.Manoharan Sundaram Addl. Govt. Pleader ORDER

¶8

The petitioner has filed the above writ petition to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records on the file of the 2^nd respondent dated 19.11.2015, to

¶9

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

¶10

quash the same as being without jurisdiction and authority of law and further direct the respondents to return the cheque No.37396847, dated 21.9.2015, for a sum of Rs.3,86,220/- issued by the petitioner.

¶11

It is the case of the petitioner that without an assessment order being passed against the petitioner, the first respondent had collected the cheque from the petitioner, which is against the settled position of law.

¶12

Mr.R.Senniappan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the respondents may be directed to return the cheque to the petitioner.

¶13

4.Mr.Manoharan Sundaram, learned Additional Government Pleader(Taxes), appearing for the respondents submitted that since the cheque was collected by the first respondent without an assessment order being passed against the petitioner, the respondents may be directed to return the cheque to the petitioner.

¶14

In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, the impugned notice dated 19.11.2015 is set aside and the respondents are directed to return the cheque cheque No.37396847, dated 21.9.2015 issued by the petitioner for a sum of Rs.3,86,220/- to them, within a period of three days, from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, since the same was collected by the respondents without an order being made against the petitioner.

¶15

With this observation, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. Rj s/dAssistant Registrar(CCC)

¶16

True Copy

¶17

Sub-Assistant Registrar To 1 The Joint Commissioner (CT) (Enforcement Wing) Coimbatore 2 The Assistant Commissioner (CT) Rural Assessment Circle Tirupur

¶18

1 cc to Mr.R.Senniappan, Advocate, SR 24325 + 1 cc to Spl.Govt.Pleader, High Court, Madras SR 24450

¶19

ks(co) W.P.No.13795 of 2016 & prk26/4 W.M.P.No.12109 of 2016

¶20

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

M/s.Venu Residency, v. The Joint Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s.Venu Residency, v. The Joint Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

R. Karthik Vs The State Transport Authority

M/s.National Dairy Development Vs Commissioner of Commercial

Dhanakotti, Vs The District Collector

S.Thangammal Vs The District Collector

G.Vaithilingam Vs The Regional Transport

M/s.Sri Kannika Parameswari Vs The Assistant Commissioner