M/s.Balaji Machine Works Pvt. v. The Assistant Commissioner

Madras HC24 Feb 2020WP/32277/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court disposed of six-writ petitions filed by companies challenging impugned tax assessment orders dated 03.08.2015. The court observed that the petitioner-counsel submitted no notice or personal hearing was issued. The High Court inclined to quash the challenged orders and remitted the matters for fresh orders after a proper hearing.

What did the court decide?

Impugned orders dated 03.08.2015 quashed and cases remanded to pass fresh speaking orders after issuing notice and hearing within three months.

M/s.Balaji Machine Works Pvt. Vs The Assistant Commissioner — Madras HC (2020) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED :24.02.2020

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN

¶5

M/s.Balaji Machine Works Pvt. Ltd., rep.by Mr.G.Velmurugan, Authorised signatory, Site No.48, 49, Sri Subaganesh Industrial Estate, Kuppepalayam-Post,

¶6

Kattampattty Village, Annur, Coimbatore. .. Petitioner in W.Ps.Nos.32277 to 32280/2015 and 32359 to 32366 of 2015

¶7

M/S.Mantra Industries Limited, S.F.No.249/1A, Kadathur, Kattampatty village, Annur, Coimbatore, reb.by its Authorised Signatory Anandakala

¶8

.. Petitioner in W.P.Nos32281 to 32284/2015

¶9

The Assistant Commissioner (CT), Avinashi Assessment Circle, Avinashi.

¶10

.. Respondent in all W.Ps.

¶11

Prayer in W.P.Nos.32277 to 32284 of 2015: Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records comprised in impugned orders TIN.No. 3341-2122129/2009-10, CST.No.1025776/2011-12, TIN.No. 3341-2122129/2013-14, TIN.No. 3341-2122129/2014-15, TIN.No 3393-2084304/2013-14, TIN.No. 3393-2084304/2011-12, TIN.No.3393-2084304/2012-13 & TIN.No.33932084304/2014-15 respectively dated 03.08.2015 on the file of the respondent and quash the same, and consequently direct the respondent to pass appropriate orders after giving an opportunity of personal hearing and considering the representation.

¶12

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

¶13

Prayer in W.P.Nos.32359 to 32362 of 2015 & W.P.Nos.: Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records comprised in impugned orders TIN.No.33412122129/2008-09, TIN.No.3341-2122129/2010-11, TIN.No.33412122129/2011-12 & TIN.No.3341-2122129/2012-13 respectively dated 03.08.2015 on the file of the respondent and quash the same, and consequently, direct the respondent to pass appropriate orders after issuing the notice and giving an opportunity of personal hearing and considering the representation.

¶14

Prayer in W.P.Nos.32363 to 32366 of 2015: Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records comprised in impugned orders CST.No.1025776/2008-09, CST.No.1025776/2012-13, CST.No.1025776/2010-11 & CST.No.1025776/2009-10 respectively dated 03.08.2015 and rectification the orders CST.No.1025776/2008-09, CST.No.1025776/2012-13, CST.No.1025776/2010-11 &

¶15

CST.No.1025776/2009-10 respectively dated 03.08.2015 on the file of the respondent and quash the same, and consequently direct the respondent to pass appropriate orders after giving an opportunity of personal hearing and considering the representation.

¶16

For Petitioner : Ms.D.Naveena (In all W.Ps.)

¶17

For Respondent : Mr.G.Dhanamadhri (In all W.P.s) Government Advocate

¶18

COMMON ORDER

¶19

Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record. By this common order, all the Writ Petitions are being disposed.

¶20

These writ petitions have been filed challenging the impugned orders dated 03.08.2015 passed by the respondent for various respective Assessment Years.

¶21

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondent has not issued any notice to the petitioner and the respondent has also not given any opportunity of personal hearing before passing the impugned orders.

¶22

The learned counsel for the respondent submits that the notice has been served.

¶23

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

¶24

Considering the facts and circumstances of these cases, I am inclined to quash the impugned orders dated 03.08.2015 and remit the cases back to the respondent to pass speaking fresh orders after considering the representation of the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Before passing such orders, the respondent shall issue appropriate notice of hearing to the petitioner.

¶25

With the above directions, the Writ Petitions are disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶26

Sd/-
Assistant Registrar
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
tta / jen
To
The Assistant Commissioner (CT),
Avinashi Assessment Circle,
Avinashi.
+1 cc to The Special Government Pleader(Taxes),sr no. 16404
+2 ccs to Mr.S.Durairaj, Advocate Sr.No.15892
W.P.Nos.32277 to 32284 and
32359 to 32366 of 2015
and
M.P.Nos.1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1,
1, 1, 1, 1, and 1 of 2015
GJII(CO)
RMP(23/07/2020)

¶27

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

M/s.Balaji Machine Works Pvt. v. The Assistant Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s.Balaji Machine Works Pvt. 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

Madras Travels and Tours Vs the Commissioner of Service

M/s.Hlg Trading, Vs The Commissioner of Customs

Gothi Impex Vs The Commercial Tax Officer

M/s.Nrs Earth Movers, Vs The Commercial Tax Officer

M/S.Valliammai Society Vs the Director General of Income

The Aminjikarai Mosque & Vs the Commissioner