Allowed

Sri Vadivudaiamman Steel v. The Assistant Commissioner(St)

Madras HC24 Jul 2018WP/17907/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court dismissed challenge to assessment orders under TN VAT Act. Court found violation of natural justice due to lack of personal hearing post-document submission. Petition allowed; matter remanded for reasoned order.

What did the court decide?

Impugned assessment orders set aside and matter remanded for fresh consideration with personal hearing and reasoned order.

Sri Vadivudaiamman Steel Vs The Assistant… — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

Dated : 24.07.2018

¶4

Coram

¶5

The Hon'ble Mr.Justice T.S.Sivagnanam

¶6

Writ Petition Nos.17907 to 17909 of 2018 and W.M.P.Nos.21204 to 21206 of 2018

¶7

Sri.Vadivudalamman Steel Company Represented by its Partner Pramod Singh 3/1, Manali Express High Road T.K.P.Nagar Thiruvottiyur Chennai – 91 ... Petitioner in all WPs.

¶8

Vs.

¶9

The Assistant Commissioner (ST) Manali Assessment Circle 5/79, 5^th Main Road K.K.D.Nagar, Kodungaiyur Chennai – 118 ...Respondent in all WPs.

¶10

Writ Petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the respondent in TIN 33411086363/201314 TIN33411086363/2014-15 & TIN 33411086363/2015-16 dated 04.05.2018 and quash the same under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and direct the respondent to pass appropriate orders on the objections dated 03.03.2018 and 03.04.2018 with opportunity of personal hearing.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Kumar For Respondent : Mr.M.Hariharan

¶12

Additional Government Pleader

¶13

ORDER

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

¶17

The petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned Assessment Orders passed under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 for the Assessment years 2013-14 to 2015-16. The first issue, which has been raised by the petitioner in this writ petition, is that no opportunity of personal hearing was granted to clarify the factual position.

¶18

The learned Government Advocate was directed to get instruction on that aspect. The respondent has furnished written instructions. It is admitted in the written instructions that personal hearing with the dealer was held on 21.03.2018 and they were requested to produce documents in support of their claim in the letter dated 21.03.2018 giving them 15 days time from. From the material papers placed before this Court, it is seen that by letter dated 03.04.2018, the petitioner has furnished documents. The respondent in the written instruction has admitted that the documents were received from the dealer for verification on 06.04.2018. Therefore, the respondent should have afforded an opportunity of personal hearing on receipt of the documents, especially when she called for the documents and granted 15 days time.

¶19

Thus for the above reasons, this Court is of the view that the impugned assessment orders suffer from violation of principles of natural justice.

¶20

In the light of the above, these writ petitions are allowed and the impugned orders are set aside and the matter is remanded to the respondent for fresh consideration. The respondent is directed to afford an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner and consider the documents produced by them. After verifying the documents produced by the petitioner thoroughly, the respondent is directed to pass a reasoned order on merits and in accordance with law. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶21

Sd/Assistant Registrar // True Copy//

¶22

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶23

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

gpa

The Assistant Commissioner (ST) Manali Assessment Circle 5/79, 5^th Main Road K.K.D.Nagar, Kodungaiyur Chennai – 118

¶28

+1cc to Mr.R.KUMAR, Advocate SR.No.49452

¶29

+1cc to Special Government Pleader (Taxes) SR.No.50068

¶30

Writ Petition Nos.17907 to 17909 of 2018 & W.M.P.Nos.21204 to 21206 of 2018 CNR(CO) SMI/14.08.2018

¶31

24 .07.2018

¶32

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

Sri Vadivudaiamman Steel v. The Assistant Commissioner(St)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Vadivudaiamman Steel v. The Assistant Commissioner(St)

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

Mrs.P.Kalyani Vs The commissioner, Greater

Girias Investment Private Vs the Assistant Commissioner(St)

M/s.Globe Ecologistics (P) Ltd. Vs The Deputy commercial Tax

V.R. Loganathan Vs Mr. G. Dakshinamoorthy

C.Dhanasekar Vs The District Manager

P.Suresh,No.87,East street, Vs The State Tax Officer