Disposed

M/s. Mas Milk Gova, v. Deputy Tax Officer

Madras HC13 Jun 2018WP/4362/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court held that classification issues cannot be decided in a writ petition. The petitioner was directed to pay 15% disputed tax and approach the Assessing Officer before seeking extraordinary relief, with the tax demand stayed pending compliance.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to pay 15% disputed tax within three weeks to treat impugned orders as show-cause notices; balance tax demand stayed pending authority's reassessment.

M/s. Mas Milk Gova, Vs Deputy Tax Officer — Income Tax | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 13.06.2018

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM

¶5

W.P.No.4362 & 4363 of 2018 & W.M.P.Nos.5355 to 5358 of 2018

¶6

M/s.MAS Milk Gowa

¶7

Rep. by its Proprietrix A. Sargunam No.536, Gandhi Road Mecheri Kalavai-632 506 Vellore District ... Petitioner in both Writ Petitions

¶8

Vs.

¶9

Deputy Tax Officer Arcot Vellore District ...Respondent in both Writ Petitions

¶10

Prayer: Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records on the file of the Respondent in its impugned proceedings made in TIN 33504582339/2013-14 and TIN 33504582339/2014-15 dated 15.11.2017 and quash the same.

¶11

Heard Ms.R.Hemalatha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.G.Dhanamadhri, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent.

¶12

2.The petitioner has filed these writ petitions challenging the Assessment Orders under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 for the assessment years 2013-14 and 2014-15. The petitioner, without filing objections to the revision notices dated 15.09.2017 and 25.09.2017, has approached this Court contending that the impugned orders are unsustainable and the petitioner has to be treated as a Sweet Stall under the

¶13

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

¶14

provisions of Section 7(1)(a) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax, 2006 and Section 3(1)(a) of the Act will not apply.

¶15

In my considered view, this factual position cannot be gone into in a writ petition and the petitioner has to necessarily approach the Authorities. In the light of the fact that the writ petition was entertained and an order of stay has been granted, this Court is inclined to grant one more opportunity to the petitioner to go before the Assessing Officer, subject to conditions.

¶16

Accordingly, these writ petitions are disposed of by directing the petitioner to pay 15% of the disputed tax for each Assessment Year within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If this condition is complied with within the time permitted, the petitioner is entitled to treat the impugned order as show-cause notice and submit their objections within a period of two weeks thereafter. On receipt of objection, the respondent shall afford an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner and redo the assessment in accordance with law. Till the above exercise is completed, the demand of the balance of tax penalty shall remain stayed. In the event of petitioner fails to comply with the above condition, the benefit of this order will not enure to the petitioner and the writ petitions would stand automatically dismissed without further reference to this Court. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶17

Sd/Assistant Registrar(CS VI) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar gpa To Deputy Tax Officer, Arcot, Vellore District. +2cc to M/S.R.Hemalatha, Advocate Sr.37172 +1cc to the Special Government Pleader Sr.37657

¶18

W.P.No.4362 and 4363 of 2018 & W.M.P.Nos.5355 to 5358 of 2018

¶19

srg 21/06/2018

¶20

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

M/s. Mas Milk Gova, v. Deputy Tax Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. Mas Milk Gova, v. Deputy Tax Officer

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.Kamal Vs S.Ramesh Kumar

M/S.Stanes Motors(South India) Vs Sri.S.Mahesh

G. Manoharan Vs the Commissioner

K.Velayutham Vs The Assistant Commissioner of

Kasa Anlagen India Private Vs the State Tax Officer

N.Arjunan, Vs The Income Tax Officer