Remanded

G.K.S. Exporters v. Assistant Commissioner (Ct)

Madras HC26 Apr 2018WP/10598/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court set aside an assessment order issued without providing the petitioner an opportunity of being heard. The matter was remanded to the respondent to redo the assessment after considering objections. No coercive recovery actions were permitted till fresh orders are passed.

What did the court decide?

The impugned assessment order is treated as a show cause notice; the matter is remanded to the respondent to redo the assessment after considering objections; no coercive recovery action is to be init

G.K.S. Exporters Vs Assistant… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

In the High Court of Judicature at Madras

¶2

Dated : 26.4.2018

¶3

Coram :

¶4

The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM

¶5

Writ Petition No.10598 of 2018

¶6

& WMP.Nos.12563 & 12564 of 2018

¶7

G.K.S.Exporters rep. by its Proprietor

¶8

Vs The Assistant Commissioner (CT), Ambur. ...Respondent

¶9

PETITION under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records of the respondent in order in TIN No.33074264078/2013-14 dated 31.8.2016 and quash the same.

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr.Adithya Reddy For Respondent : Mr.M.Hariharan, AGP

¶11

ORDER

¶12

Mr.M.Hariharan, learned Additional Government Pleader accepts notice for the respondent. Heard both. By consent, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal.

¶13

The petitioner, which is a registered dealer on the file of the respondent under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, is aggrieved by the impugned assessment order for the year 2013-14.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner points out that though, in the impugned order, it has been stated that notice has been served on the petitioner and that the petitioner filed their objections, the petitioner has not received any such notice nor filed any objections. It is further pointed out that in a single line, the respondent stated that the objections were overruled while passing the impugned assessment order.

¶15

This Court finds from the preamble to the impugned order in the reference column that there is no reference to the dealer's reply. Had the dealer sent a reply, the respondent could have referred to the date, on which, the reply was received and extracted the gist of the objections raised by the dealer. Thus, it can be safely presumed that no reply was given

¶16

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

¶17

by the petitioner.

¶18

Furthermore, the learned counsel for the petitioner points out that the impugned order itself states that the registration of the other end dealers was canceled with retrospective effect and that cannot be a ground to reverse the input tax credit availed by the petitioner.

¶19

In my considered view, these issues can be considered by the respondent, for which purpose, this Court deems it appropriate to remand the matter for a fresh consideration.

¶20

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of by directing the petitioner to treat the impugned assessment order as a show cause notice and submit their objections within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of the objections, the respondent shall fix a date for personal hearing and if the petitioner requires any clarification or details or documents, the same shall be furnished and after providing an effective opportunity, the respondent shall redo the assessment in accordance with law. Till the above exercise is completed and fresh orders are passed, no coercive action shall be initiated against the petitioner for recovery of tax and penalty as quantified in the impugned assessment order. No costs. Consequently, the connected WMPs are closed.

¶21

s/dAssistant Registrar(CS-III) True Copy Sub-Assistant Registrar To

¶22

The Assistant Commissioner (CT), Ambur.

¶23

+1 CC to Mr.Adithya Reddy, Advocate sr 31407.

¶24

WP.No.10598 of 2018 & WMP. Nos.12563 & 12564 of 2018 SP(16/05/2018)

¶25

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

G.K.S. Exporters v. Assistant Commissioner (Ct)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G.K.S. Exporters v. Assistant Commissioner (Ct)

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

Syed Anvarullah Hussiny Vs Mr. Palanikumar

Sri Ramakrishna Yarn Carriers Vs Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Jain

Dr.B.Mahender, Vs The Commissioner

M/s.Competition Team Vs Union of India

M/s.Ponni Mobiles rep by Vs The Assistant Commissioner

M/s.K.Pattabhirama Mudaliar, Vs The Deputy Commercial Officer