Allowed

Tvl.Bash Granites, v. The Assistant Commissioner

Madras HC18 Jun 2018WP/13811/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court held that an assessment order violates natural justice principles if the acknowledging authority fails to consider subsequently filed revised returns. Consequently, the writ petition was allowed, the order was set aside, and the matter remitted for fresh assessment.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition allowed; impugned order set aside; matter remitted for fresh assessment and hearing.

Tvl.Bash Granites, Vs The Assistant Commissioner — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 18.06.2018

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM

¶5

W.P.No.13811 of 2018 &

¶6

W.M.P. No.16296 of 2018

¶7

Tvl. Bash Granites Rep. by its Partner, K.Shoukath Ali Omalur Main Road, Salem - 4 .. Petitioner

¶8

The Assistant Commissioner (CT) (FAC)

¶9

Now Designated as Assistant Commissioner (ST) (FAC) Arisipalayam Assessment Circle

¶10

Salem - 7 .. Respondent

¶11

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records on the file of the respondent in CST No.705352/2007-08, dated 31.10.2017 and connected proceedings dated 15.11.2011 and quash the same as being without jurisdiction and authority of law and contrary to the principles of natural justice.

¶12

Heard Mr.R.Senniappan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.M.Hariharan, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondent.

¶13

The petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging the assessment order passed under the provisions of Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, for the assessment year 2007-08.

¶14

Though several grounds have been raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner challenging the impugned assessment order, the first and foremost ground raised is by contending that the revised returns filed by the petitioner and acknowledged by the respondent as could be seen in the delivery book has not been taken into consideration. Therefore, when the matter is taken up for consideration on 08.06.2018, the

¶15

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

¶16

court directed the learned Government Advocate to get specific instructions as to why the revised returns which were filed by the petitioner and acknowledged by the respondent on 20.02.2018 have not been considered by the respondent while passing the impugned assessment order.

¶17

The respondent-Assessing Officer has given written instructions dated 08.06.2018 to the learned Additional Government Pleader. However, the respondent has not answered the specific query raised by the court, which goes to show that revised returns have not been taken into consideration by the Assessing Officer, though it was acknowledged by the Officer. Hence, on the short ground, this court holds that the impugned assessment order is in violation of principles of natural justice.

¶18

Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed, the impugned order is set side and the matter is remitted back to the respondent for fresh consideration. The respondent is directed to take into consideration the revised returns filed by the petitioner, afford an opportunity of personal hearing and redo the assessment. It is open to the petitioner to place all the records in support of their contentions including the exported documents, which shall be considered by the respondent and appropriate orders to be passed, in accordance with law. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. Sd/Assistant Registrar(CS-iv) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar Rj To The Assistant Commissioner (CT) (FAC) Now Designated as Assistant Commissioner (ST) (FAC) Arisipalayam Assessment Circle Salem - 7 +1cc to Mr.R.SENNIAPPAN, Advocate, S.R.No. 37974 +1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No. 38347

¶19

W.P.No.13811 of 2018 & W.M.P.No.16296 of 2018

¶20

TR(26/06/2018)

¶21

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

Tvl.Bash Granites, v. The Assistant Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tvl.Bash Granites, 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

S.Gokul, Vs The Commissioner

Tamarabarani Enterprise and Vs Tax Recovery Officer

Indian Overseas Bank Vs the Commissioner of Commercial

Nkcm Spinners, Vs the Assistant Commissioner

Greaves Cotton Limited Vs the Deputy Commissioner

M/S. Radha Metals Vs Assistant Commissioner