Partly allowed

Nkcm Spinners, v. the Assistant Commissioner

Madras HC18 Jun 2018WP/26287/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court entertained writ petitions challenging revision notices, holding the challenge academic on merits but orderable before an authoritative precedent on exemption. Writ partly allowed; assessment to proceed for full year.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition partly allowed; liberty granted to respondent to issue notices and complete assessments for the full year.

Nkcm Spinners, Vs the Assistant Commissioner — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 18.06.2018 CORAM THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM

¶2

W.P.Nos.26287 & 26288 of 2009 & M.P.Nos.1 of 2009 ( 2 MPs)

¶3

NKCM Spinners Reprsented by its Paqrtner Narendra Kumar Nakhat No.77, West Colony Kumarapalayam .. Petitioner in WP.No.26287/09

¶4

NKCM Spinners Pvt. Ltd., Represented by its Managing Director Narendra Kumar Nakhat No.77 West Colony, Kumarapalayam ..Petitioner in WP.No.26288/09

¶5

¶6

The Assistant Commissioner (CT) Sankagiri .. Respondent in both WPs

¶7

W.P.No.26287/2009 : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records on the files of the respondent herein in his TIN No.33623224758/2007-08 (April 2007) dated 19.11.2008.

¶8

W.P.No.26288/2009 : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records on the files of the respondent herein in his TIN No.33883226973/2008-09 (April 2008) dated 19.11.2008.

¶9

For Petitioner : Mr.N.Inbarajan

¶10

For Respondent : Mr.M.Hariharan

¶11

Additional Government Pleader

¶12

COMMON ORDER

¶13

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

¶14

The writ petitions have been filed by the petitioner challenging the revision notices issued for the month of April 2007 and April 2008.

¶15

Admittedly, the assessment years are over, therefore, as of now, the challenge to the impugned notices have become academic, as they cannot be implemented and the assessments have to be done for the full year. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶16

The petitioner has challenged the impugned notices on merits on the ground that they are entitled for exemption in

¶17

respect of sale of Hank Yarn. This plea has been rejected by this court in the case of Aakavi Spinning Mills Pvt. Ltd. v. Authority for Clarification and Advance Ruling, Chennai and another [2018(52) GSTR 80(Mad)] .

¶18

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that as against the above referred decision, appeals have been filed, but, there is no order of stay.

¶19

Considering the challenge to the impugned notices, on the first ground, this court is inclined to entertain the writ petition and not on the second ground with regard to the claim of exemption .

¶20

Accordingly, the writ petition is partly allowed for the reasons stated above giving liberty to the respondent to issue notices and complete the assessments for the full year. No costs. Consequently connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶21

Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS-IV )
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
Rj
To
The Assistant Commissioner (CT)
Sankagiri

¶22

+1cc to M/s.N.Inbarajan, Advocate Sr.No.38082 +1cc to Special Government Pleader Sr.No.38344

¶23

RR (co) Sm:16.7.2018

¶24

W.P.Nos.26287 & 26288 of 2009 & M.P.Nos.1 of 2009 ( 2 MPs)

¶25

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

Nkcm Spinners, v. the Assistant Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nkcm Spinners, 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

Cases cited

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

Greaves Cotton Limited Vs the Deputy Commissioner

M/S. Radha Metals Vs Assistant Commissioner

R.Subramanian Vs The Commissioenr