In a writ petition challenging a tax revision order, the High Court set aside the decision setting the record aside and the matter remanded back to the authorities for fresh consideration.
Impugned order set aside; matter remanded for fresh consideration with personal hearing within three months.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF MADRAS
DATED: 11.07.2019
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.S. RAMESH
W.P.No.18037 of 2015
M/s.Sri Latha Traders, Rep. by its Proprietrix, No.169, Medavakkam Main Road, Adambakkam,
Chennai - 600088. ...Petitioner
Vs
Commercial Tax Officer, Madipakkam Assessment Circle, Medavakkam,
Chennai - 600100. ...Respondent
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the respondent in his proceedings in TIN No.33890982503/2011-12 dated 30.04.2015 and quash the order passed therein and to direct the respondent to pass revised orders pursuant to Section 3(4) of the TNVAT Act, 2006 and provide an opportunity of personal hearing under compounding scheme.
For Petitioner : Mr.C.Baktha Siromoni
For Respondent : Mr.V.Haribabu, AGP
O R D E R
The only ground raised by the petitioner is that, when the impugned order in revision was passed, the authorities have relied upon the details of purchase from the other end dealers and have extracted such details in the order, which according to the petitioner requires to be cross verified by the purchase bills available with the dealers.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar (CO)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
hvk
To
The Commercial Tax Officer,
Madipakkam Assessment Circle,
Medavakkam,
Chennai – 600100.
+1cc to the Special Government Pleader, S.R.No. 59372
W.P.No.18037 of 2015
VSN II(CO)
GN(21/08/2019)
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is eligible for compounding at 0.5% given their turnover claims.
Whether the authorities relied upon details of purchases from other end dealers without cross-verifying purchase bills.
Whether an opportunity for a personal hearing is required before passing the impugned revision order.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
M/s. Sri Latha Traders
Commercial Tax Officer
M.S. Ramesh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
