Partly allowed

M/s.Gmmco Ltd, v. Commercial Tax Officer, (Enf)

Madras HC18 Jan 2018WP/760/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted liberty to the petitioner to file a revision petition challenging goods detention notices, noting the petitioner had already paid the one-time tax and claimed a strong case, directing the authority not to reject it on limitation grounds.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to file revision petition within 15 days; revisional authority shall not reject on grounds of limitation.

M/s.Gmmco Ltd, Vs Commercial Tax Officer, (Enf) — Madras HC (2018) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 18.01.2018

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM

¶5

W.P.No.760 of 2018

¶6

M/s.Gmmco Limited,

¶7

Rep. by its Authorized Signatory, No.6, GST Road, St.Thomas Mount, Chennai - 600 016.

¶8

... Petitioner Vs.

¶9

Commercial Tax Officer (Enf) Roving Squad, Vellore. ... Respondent

¶10

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to permit the petitioner to file revision petition against the levy of compounding fee as per the notice in G.D.NO.601/2016-17 dated 23.11.2016 and also on 14.11.2017 before the first revisional authority.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.C.Baktha Siromoni For Respondents : Mrs.G.Dhana Madhri Government Advocate O R D E R Heard Mr.C.Baktha Siromoni, learned counsel for the petitioner and M/s.G.Dhana Madhiri, learned Government Advocate for the respondent.

¶12

2.The petitioner, a Multinational Company has approached this Court seeking for a direction to permit the petitioner to file a revision petition against the levy of compounding fee as per the Goods Detention notice dated 23.11.2016 and 14.11.2017. It is not known as to why a Multinational Company was not diligent in prosecuting their affairs, especially when the Court specifically permitted the petitioner to avail the revisional remedy under the provisions of the Act in the earlier writ petition filed by them in W.P.No.41446 of 2016 dated 28.11.2016 which was filed challenging the goods detention notice. As directed in the said writ petition, the petitioner has paid the one time tax at Rs.2,30,904/- and they now seek permission of this Court to file a revision petition before the concerned

¶13

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

¶14

Joint Commissioner. The present attempt of the petitioner appears to be only because the Check Post Officer issued show cause notice dated 14.11.2017 calling upon them to appear in person.

¶15

3.Considering the fact that the petitioner has paid the one time tax and it is represented that as of now, the finance of the Company are not in a very sound condition and the petitioner's claim that they have an excellent case before the revisional authority, this Court is inclined to grant an opportunity to the petitioner to file a revision against the goods detention notice dated 23.11.2016 and 14.11.2017. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to file a revision petition before the concerned Joint Commissioner challenging the goods detention notice dated 23.11.2016 and 14.11.2017 and if such revision petition is filed within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, the revisional authority shall not reject the revision petition on the ground of limitation to consider the same on merits and in accordance with law. No costs.

¶16

Sd/Assistant Registrar(CS-VII) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar cse To The Commercial Tax Officer (Enf) Roving Squad, Vellore.

¶17

W.P.No.760 of 2018 BR(CO) EU(08/02/2018 )

¶18

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

M/s.Gmmco Ltd, v. Commercial Tax Officer, (Enf)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s.Gmmco Ltd, v. Commercial Tax Officer, (Enf)

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

M/s.M.M.Sign Vision, Vs

M/s.Shanthi Builders, Vs The Assistant Commissioner of

M/s.Pranav Exports Vs The Deputy Director

M/s.The LIC Employees Vs The Assistant Commissioner

State Bank of India, Vs The Assistant Commissioner

M/s.Isha Exim Vs The Additional Director