Remanded

Shri Vijayalakshmi Agency v. the Assistant Commissioner (Ct

Madras HC10 Jul 2019WP/12540/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged an Assessment Order for reversal of Input Tax Credit. Court held that specific objections raised by petitioner were extracted in the order without due consideration. Held that order must be remanded for fresh consideration after opportunity of hearing.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order in TIN No.33461261954/2008-09 dated 07.02.2012 set aside; matter remanded to 1st respondent for fresh consideration within 3 months.

Shri Vijayalakshmi Agency Vs the Assistant Commissioner… — Banking and Recovery | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 10.07.2019

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.S. RAMESH

W.P.No.12540 of 2012

and

M.P.No.1 of 2012

Shri Vijayalakshmi Agency,
rep.by its Proprietor,
G.M.Chandrasekar,
37/19, Govindappa naicken Street,
Chennai-1. ...Petitioner
Vs
1.The Assistant Commissioner (CT)
Mannady (West) Circle
Wavoo Complex, NSC Bose Road,
Chennai-1.
2.The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer,
Mannady (West) Circle,
Wavoo Complex, NSC Bose Road,
Chennai-1.
3.The Assistant Commissioner (CT)
Vallalar Nagar Assessment Circle,
Angappa Naicken Street,
Chennai-1. ...Respondents

¶9

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records of the respondent in TIN 33461261954/200809 dated 07.02.2012 and quash the impugned proceedings dated 07.02.2012.

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Kumar

¶11

For Respondents: Ms.G.Dhanamadhri Govt.Advocate

¶12

O R D E R

¶13

Pursuant to the notice issued by the 1^st respondent herein seeking for reversal of Input Tax Credit (ITC), the petitioner herein had given his objections through a letter dated 13.10.2011, stating among other things that the purchases

¶14

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

¶15

referred to by the respondents were prior to the date of cancellation of registration of the concerned Dealers. The 1^st respondent while passing the impugned Assessment Order had extracted his objections in the Assessment Order. But without consideration of such a objections, the respondents had passed an order confirming the proposal, on the ground that the Dealer /petitioner has not come out with a proper explanation, inspite of sufficient opportunity.

¶16

In my view, when the petitioner had raised specific objections and the same has been extracted in the impugned order, due consideration should have been extended to the same. In the absence of the same, it would be proper to set aside the order and remand back the matter to the respondents for fresh consideration.

¶17

In the light of the above observations, the impugned order in TIN No.33461261954/2008-09 dated 07.02.2012 on the file of the 1st respondent is set aside and consequently, the matter is remanded back to the 1st respondent herein for fresh consideration, after giving an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner. Such an exercise shall be completed within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. During such exercise of fresh re-assessment, the petitioner is at liberty to raise further objections before the authorities.

¶18

The writ petition stands disposed of with the above observations. No costs. Consequently connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶19

Sd/-

¶20

Assistant Registrar (Insp Cell)

¶21

//True Copy//

¶22

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶23

¶24

¶25

1.The Assistant Commissioner (CT) Mannady (West) Circle Wavoo Complex, NSC Bose Road,

¶26

Chennai-1.

¶27

2.The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Mannady (West) Circle, Wavoo Complex, NSC Bose Road, Chennai-1.

¶28

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

¶29

3.The Assistant Commissioner (CT) Vallalar Nagar Assessment Circle, Angappa Naicken Street, Chennai-1.

¶30

+1cc to Mr.R.Kumar, Advocate, S.R.No. 57976

¶31

+1cc to the Special Government Pleader, S.R.No. 59390

¶32

W.P.No.12540 of 2012 RR(CO) GN(26/08/2019)

¶33

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

Shri Vijayalakshmi Agency v. the Assistant Commissioner (Ct

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri Vijayalakshmi Agency v. the Assistant Commissioner (Ct

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.Aircel Limited, Vs Union of India

Sakthi Ganesh Infrastructure Vs Assistant Commissioner (Ct)

Mr.Kuhni Moideen, Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

M/S Kothari Industrial Vs the Union of India

Shri Vijayalakshmi Agency Vs the Assistant Commissioner (Ct

Shri Vijayalakshmi Agency Vs the Assistant Commissioner (Ct