Allowed

M/S.Nakshatra Service v. the Assistant Commissioner

Madras HC21 Nov 2019WP/4100/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging VAT assessment orders against a lodging house. Court directed consolidation of all petitioner's apartments as one taxable entity with uniformity and remanded determination of taxable activity to Assessing Authority before setting aside impugned orders and allowing petitions.

What did the court decide?

Impugned assessment orders set aside. Direction issued to Assessing Authority to consolidate all apartments as one taxable entity within eight weeks and determine applicability of Section 7(1)(b).

M/S.Nakshatra Service Vs the Assistant Commissioner — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 21.11.2019

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH

¶5

W.P.No.4100 to 4102 of 2013

¶6

M/s.Nakshatra Services Apartments, Rep.by Director No.17, Chitaranjan Road Alwarpet, Chennai-600 018 ...Petitioner

¶7

--Vs--

¶8

The Assistant Commissioner (CT), Mandaveli Assessment Circle, Chennai

¶9

... Respondent

¶10

¶11

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ or order of direction or any other Writ in the nature Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records of the respondent in his proceedings in Rc.1774/2010/2008-2009 to 2010-11/TNVAT and quash the assessment order dated 31.08.2012.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.C.Subramanian

¶13

For Respondents : Mr.G.Dhana Madhri

¶14

Government Advocate

¶15

O R D E R

¶16

The challenge in this writ petition is to orders dated 31.08.2012 for the periods 2008-09 to 2010-11 in terms of the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 (in short 'Act').

¶17

The petitioner runs a lodging house under the name and style of Nakshatra. The impugned order brings to tax the turnover of the petitioner in terms of Section 7(1)(b) of the Act, at the rate of 2%. The provisions of Section 7(1)(b) bring to tax the receipts from the sale of food and drink by non-star category restaurants.

¶18

¶19

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

¶20

Two submissions are made by Mr.S.C.Subramanian, learned counsel for the petitioner. The first is to the effect that the petitioner, in fact, is not engaged in the sale of food and drinks per se and the second is that the turnover of the petitioner is only a sum of Rs.55,183/-, which is far below the threshold for taxation prescribed under the Statue.

¶21

A learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.Nos.4064 to 4066 & 4096 to 4098 of 2013 by order dated 02.07.2019, has considered a challenge to the assessments framed upon this very petitioner, in relation to other service apartments being run by it, though assessed separately. In the aforesaid order, there has been a direction issued to the Assessing officer to consolidate all the apartments of the apartments run by the petitioner as one taxable entity and to tax the turnover from the same in one single unified assessment.

¶22

In the interest of consistency and uniformity, let turnover from the present petitioner also be consolidated along with the turnovers of the petitioner in above writ petitions and a single assessment be made, consolidating all the service apartments as one taxable unit. This exercise should be carried out within a period of eight weeks from date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶23

As regards the submission of the petitioner to the effect that there is no taxable activity and the provisions of Section 7(1)(b) would not be attracted, let this question also be determined by the Assessing Authority upon hearing the petitioners' submissions in this regard and considering any/all supporting evidences filed by it.

¶24

With the aforesaid observation, the impugned order is set aside and these writ petitions allowed. No costs.

¶25

ska

¶26

¶27

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

¶28

¶29

The Assistant Commissioner (CT), Mandaveli Assessment Circle, Chennai

¶30

+1cc to M/s.C.Subramanian, Advocate SR.96863

¶31

+1cc to M/s.Spl.Government Pleader SR.97796

¶32

W.P.No.4100 to 4102 of 2013

¶33

BP(CO) CB(20/02/2020)

¶34

¶35

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

M/S.Nakshatra Service v. the Assistant Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S.Nakshatra Service v. the Assistant Commissioner

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

Tvl.Suba Valli Vilas Vs The Appellate Deputy

I. Lakshmanan Vs the Deputy Commissioner

The West Coast Paper Mills Ltd. Vs the Assistant Commissioner(Ct)

Mrs.Jayasree Balakrishnan Vs the Secretary (Finance)

Shri.G.N.Anbuchezhian Vs The Deputy Director of Income

M/S.Space Crafts Vs the Assistant Commissioner