Disposed

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

Madras HC23 Jul 2018WP/18665/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging a compounding fee order. It granted an opportunity to the petitioner to file a revision before the Joint Commissioner within 15 days, exempting the revisional authority from rejecting it on the ground of limitation.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was disposed of by permitting the petitioner to file a revision before the Joint Commissioner within 15 days, exempting the Revisional Authority from rejecting the revision on limita

M/s.Globe Ecologistics (P) Ltd. Vs The Deputy… — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

In the High Court of Judicature at Madras

¶2

Dated : 23.7.2018

¶3

Coram :

¶4

The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM

¶5

Writ Petition No.18665 of 2018 & WMP.No.21999 of 2018

¶6

M/s.Globe Ecologistics (P) Ltd., Chennai-108 rep.by its Vice President Mr.R.Sridhar ...Petitioner

¶7

The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer (ST), Pattanur Check Post, Morattandi, Villupuram District. ...Respondent

¶8

Prayer:PETITION under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the respondent in his proceedings in OR No.134/2015-16 (GD No.2699/2015-16) dated 21.8.2016, quash the same and further direct the respondent to pass a fresh order after considering the documents filed by the petitioner in the merits.

¶9

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Sridhar For Respondent : Mr.M.Hariharan, AGP ORDER

¶10

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.

¶11

The petitioner has challenged an order imposing compounding fee on the petitioner pursuant to the goods detention notice dated 02.10.2015.

¶12

As rightly pointed out by the learned Additional Government Pleader, as against the impugned order, the petitioner has an effective alternate remedy of filing a revision before the concerned Joint Commissioner.

¶13

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

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is willing to go before the concerned Joint Commissioner. But as of now, the period of limitation has already expired.

¶15

Considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant one opportunity to the petitioner to approach the concerned Joint Commissioner by filing a revision petition.

¶16

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of by permitting the petitioner to file a revision before the concerned Joint Commissioner. If such a revision is filed within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, the Revisional Authority shall entertain the revision without rejecting the same on the ground of limitation. No costs. Consequently, the connected WMP is closed.

¶17

Sd/Assistant Registrar(CS VIII) //True copy// Sub Assistant Registrar To The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer (ST), Pattanur Check Post, Morattandi, Villupuram District. Copy To The Section Officer, ER Section, High Court, Madras.

¶18

+1cc to Mr.R.Sridhar, Advocate SR.No.49098 +1cc to Special Government Pleader SR.No.49565

¶19

WP.No.18665 of 2018& WMP.No.21999 of 2018

¶20

SSV(CO) GN(10/08/2018)

¶21

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

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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

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

C. Sasikumar, Vs Smt. Sundaravalli, I.A.S.

Tvl.Anis Paints, Vs the Assistant Commissioner of

S.Sakayaraj Vs The Commissioner

N.Raja, Vs The Assistant Commissioner

Tvl. Datang Technologies & Vs The Commercial Tax Officer

M/s.Mefco Engineers Pvt.Ltd., Vs The Assistant Commissioner(Ct)