Allowed

Tvl.Bharath Cotton Company, v. the Commissioner of

Madras HC7 Mar 2018WP(MD)/2264/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court quashed a notice and assessment order issued by the Assistant Commissioner to the petitioner during the pendency of a related writ petition. The court remitted the matter for a fresh hearing, noting that the order in the related petition had been allowed.

What did the court decide?

The impugned notice dated 24.01.2018 and the assessment order for the year 2010-11 were quashed and remitted to the file of the second respondent with a direction to issue a fresh hearing notice.

Tvl.Bharath Cotton Company, Vs the Commissioner of — GST and Indirect Tax | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 07.03.2018 CORAM :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN

¶4

W.P(MD)No.2264 of 2018

¶5

and

¶6

WMP(MD)No.2484 of 2018

¶7

Tvl.Bharath Cotton Company, Rep.by its Proprietor, R.Ramadass

¶8

... Petitioner

¶9

Vs.

¶10

The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, O/o.the Principal and Special Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005.

¶11

The Assistant Commissioner (CT)-V, Dindigul - V Assessment Circle, Commercial Taxes Building, Sub-Collector Office Road, Dindigul. ... Respondents

¶12

Prayer : Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records pertaining to the impugned notice of the second respondent in TIN No.33705381024 dated 24.01.2018 and quash the same.

¶13

For Petitioner : M/s.P.Jessi Jeeva Priya For Respondents : Mr.K.Saravanan, Govt.Advocate

¶14

ORDER

¶15

The petitioner is registered as an assessee with the second respondent. In respect of assessment year 2011-12, an order was passed against the petitioner. The same was questioned by filing WP(MD)No.1025 of 2018. During the pendency of the said writ petition, the impugned notice dated 24.01.2018 came to be issued in respect of other assessment years.

¶16

2.The petitioner's request for deferring the proceedings till the finalization of WP(MD)No.1025 of 2018 was not accepted. This Court issued notice in the said writ petition. By the time, it could be taken up for disposal, it appears that the second respondent has passed orders in respect of assessment year 2010https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 11.

¶17

¶18

3.It is also admitted on either side that WP(MD)No.1025 of

¶19

2018 came to be allowed and the matter was remitted to the file of the second respondent herein. Therefore, it is only just and proper that the second respondent hears the matter afresh. Since this Court was seized of the matter, the second respondent ought not to have finalized the assessment orders for the year 2010-11. The order of the second respondent states that they cannot defer the proceedings till the conclusion of WP(MD)No.1025 of 2018.

¶20

4.In this view of the matter, the order impugned in this writ petition is quashed. It is made clear that the order of assessment made for the year 2010-11 would also stand quashed. The matter is remitted to the file of the second respondent and the second respondent shall issue a fresh hearing notice affording due opportunity to the petitioner and pass orders afresh in accordance with law.

¶21

5.This writ petition is allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶22

Sd/-

¶23

Assistant Registrar(W)

¶24

/True Copy/

¶25

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶26

¶27

The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, O/o.the Principal and Special Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Ezhilagam, Chepauk,

¶28

Chennai – 600 005.

¶29

The Assistant Commissioner (CT)-V, Dindigul - V Assessment Circle, Commercial Taxes Building, Sub-Collector Office Road, Dindigul.

¶30

+1cc to Mr.N.Subramanian, Advocate Sr.No.53469

¶31

+1cc to Spl.Government Pleader Sr.No. 53828

¶32

SKM

¶33

VB/SKN/RSK/SAR1/28/05/2018/2P/5C

¶34

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

¶35

W.P(MD)No.2264 of 2018 and WMP(MD)No.2484 of 2018 07.03.2018

Tvl.Bharath Cotton Company, v. the Commissioner of

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tvl.Bharath Cotton Company, v. the Commissioner of

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

N.Chithiraisekar Vs the Director of Rual

N.Palanivel, Vs the Thasildar

D.Ashik Tennison Vs the Director General of Police

Thangathai, W/O.Rajagopal, Vs the District Collector,/Cum

Dr.R.Lakshmipathy Vs the Joint Commissioner of

Sivanesan, Vs Union of India, New Delhi