The High Court dismissed writ appeals filed against an order quashing summons and pre-assessment notices. The bench held the writs were premature, directing the appellant to raise limitation and other objections before the assessing authority.
Writ Appeals and connected CMPs dismissed; no costs.
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 AT MADRAS
DATED: 06.03.2020
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R. SURESH KUMAR
W.A.Nos.262, 263, 270 and 272 of 2020 & CMP.Nos.4498,4460, 4406, 4404 of 2020
M/s. Murugan & Co., represented by its Partner P.A.Sankar, No.74, Odiampet Road, Kanuvapet, Villianur, Puducherry 605 110
... Appellant in all Writ Appeals
-vs-
Writ Appeals filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order passed by His Lordship Hon'ble Mr.Justice K.Ravichandrabaabu in W.P.Nos.15165, 15166, 15167 & 15168 of 2018 dated 12.11.2019 respectively .
Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records pertaining to the Notice dated 29/01/2016 vide Ref.34210000008/CTO-I/2011-2012, 34210000008/CTO-I/2012-13, 34210000008/CTO-I/2013-14 and 34210000008/CTO-I/2014-2015 respectively and consequential notice dated 23/06/2017 vide Ref:34210000008/CTO-I/A1/2011-12, 34210000008/CTO-I/A1/2012-13, 34210000008/CTO-I/A1/2013-14, and 34210000008/CTO-I/A1/2014-15, respectively and Pre- assessment notice dated 28/05/2018 vide Ref;34210000008/CTO-I/2011-12,34210000008/CTO-I/2012-13, 34210000008/CTO-I/2013-14, and 34210000008/CTO-I/2014-15, respectively issued by the Second respondent pertaining to the year 2011-2012, 2012-2013, 2013-2014 and 2014-2015 respectively and quash the same as null and void.
For Appellant in all : Mr.R. Sreedhar appeals For Respondents in : Mrs.N.Mala, Spl.Govt.Pleader all appeals
COMMON ORDER
[Order of the Court was made by DR.VINEET KOTHARI,J.] The petitioner/assessee M/s. Murugan & Co., has filed these intra court appeals aggrieved by the order dated 12.11.2019, passed by the learned Single Judge, dismissing the Writ Petitions, which according to the learned Single Judge, were directed only against the summons/pre-assessment notices dated 28.5.2018, pertaining to the years 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 and 2014-15 and therefore with a liberty to the petitioner to raise all his objections to the learned assessing authority, the writ petitions were dismissed.
'21. In this case, it is seen that summons in Form-PP for the years 2011-12 to 2013-14 were issued on 07.11.2014 and again on 04.01.2016, wherein and whereby the assessee was called upon to produce certain documents with reference to an enquiry under the PVAT Act, 2007, in respect of assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15. Therefore, the above summons, which is otherwise called as notice calling upon the petitioner to produce the documents for the purpose of assessment in respect of those assessment years, are to be construed as the commencement of assessment proceedings. When the above said notices were issued before the expiry of three years, this Court is of the view that the consequent preassessment notices impugned in these writ petitions are not barred by limitation and therefore, section 24(5) is not attracted in these cases in any manner. Needless to state that it is for the petitioner to participate in the assessment process by filing their objection to the notice of proposal and raise all the contentions before the Assessing Officer, as this Court is not expressing any view on the merits of the same, since as these writ petitions are disposed of only by considering the question as to whether the impugned notices are barred by limitation.
Assistant Registrar
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
To
+1cc to the Government Pleader Sr.20381 +1cc to Mr.R.Sreedhar, Advocate Sr.20148
W.A.Nos.262, 263, 270 and 272 of 2020 & CMP.Nos.4498,4460, 4406 & 4404 of 2020
kk[co] srg 09/07/2020
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a writ petition challenging pre-assessment notices is maintainable despite the assessee having liberty to raise limitation objections before the assessing authority.
Whether the learned Single Judge erred in dismissing writ petitions filed against summons/pre-assessment notices under Section 24(5) of the Pondicherry Value Added Tax Act, 2007.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
M/s. Murugan & Co.
The Union of India
The Commercial Tax Officer-I
VINEET KOTHARI
R. SURESH KUMAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
