Writ petitions challenging levy of interest under TNGST Act. Petitioner failed to prove production figures to claim eligibility for deferral scheme benefit. Court directed submission of documents and fresh hearing.
Petitioner to submit production documents within four weeks for fresh order by respondent.
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: 09.03.2020
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN
Writ Petition Nos.23862 & 23863 of 2012 & M.P.Nos.1 and 1 of 2012
Sri Senthil Andavar Cotton Mills, Dharapuram Road, Udumalpet, Represented by its Managing Director, V.Ramakrishnan,
36 Dharapuram Road, Udumalpet 642 126 Tiruppur District ... Petitioner in both W.Ps. ..vs..
The Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Udumalpet (North), Tiruppur District ... Respondent in both W.Ps.
Common Prayer:Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records of the respondent in TNGST2481082/2001-02; and 2002-03 (both) dated 31.03.2011 and to quash the same.
For Petitioner (in both W.Ps.): Mr. P.Srinivas For Respondent (in both W.Ps.): Mr. A.N.R.Prathap, Govt. Advocate (Taxes)
The levy of interest under Section 24 (3) of the erstwhile TNGST Act (now TNVAT Act) at Rs.1,70,950/- and 4,56,296/- for the incorrect availment of deferral for the assessment years 2001-02 and 2002-03, by separate orders of the respondent, dated 31.03.2011 are challenged in these writ petitions.
undertaking expansion were to be given the benefit of an interstate free deferral scheme for a period of five years. Accordingly, an agreement was executed for the purpose of implementation of the said deferral scheme. While so, a notice was issued to the petitioner inviting objections stating that the petitioner is not eligible to avail deferral for the period from April 2002 to June 2002. The petitioner vide letter dated 22.12.2006 stated that there is no specific condition as alleged by the respondent and the only stipulation to claim the benefit of deferral of sales tax is that the base volume and base sale value have to be reached in that year and they have crossed the base production volume and sale value and requested to drop the proposal of levying interest under Section 24 (3) of the TNGST Act. The reply was examined and found to be not acceptable, since as per Eligibility Certificate, the petitioner has reached the base production and base sale value during July 2002 only, but has availed deferral from April 2002 onwards. Hence the impugned orders came to be passed. Challenging the same, these writ petitions have been filed by the petitioner.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
srk
To
1. The Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes,
Udumalpet (North), Tiruppur District
+1cc to Special Government Pleader (Taxes), Sr.No.21790
W.P.Nos.23862 & 23863 of 2012
& M.P.Nos.1 & 1 of 2012
AK(CO)
Jas/29/05/2020
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Sri Senthil Andavar Cotton Mills
Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Udumalpet (North), Tiruppur District
R.MAHANDEVAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
