Disposed

Tvl Sri Meenakshi Bikes v. the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes

Madras HC13 Aug 2020WP(MD)/522/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court disposed of a writ petition seeking quashing of Tax Inspectant Notification (TIN) proceedings. The court directed the petitioner to file a rectification petition under TNVAT Act and concluded proceedings within six weeks, on which the tax demand will be held.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed; rectification proceedings directed within six weeks; impugned demand put on hold pending rectification outcome.

Tvl Sri Meenakshi Bikes Vs the Commissioner of… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

1 W.P.(MD)NO.522 OF 2020

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 13.08.2020

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN W.P.(MD)No.522 of 2020 and W.M.P.(MD)No.406&407 of 2020

¶5

Tvl.Sri Meenakshi Bikes,

¶6

Represented by its Proprietor,

V.Narayanan.

... Petitioner

Vs.

The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, O/o the Principal and Special Commissioner of

Commercial Taxes,

Ezhilagam, Chepauk,

Chennai – 600 005.

The Commercial Tax Officer, Karaikudi Assessment Circle, Commercial Tax Office, No.50/52, Jawahar Street, Karaikudi – 630 001. ... Respondents

¶15

Prayer: Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records pertaining to the impugned proceedings of the second respondent in TIN.33315482167/2013-14 dated 29.08.2016 and quash the same.

¶16

For Petitioner : Mr.B.Rooban

¶17

For Respondents : M/s.J.Padmavathi Devi,

¶18

Special Government Pleader.

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

The petitioner challenges the order impugned in this writ petition on the grounds set out in the affidavit filed in support of this petition.

¶21

The petitioner had admittedly filed a petition for rectification under Section 84 of the TNVAT Act. The petitioner undertakes to appear before the second respondent and produce all the documents within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶22

The second respondent can issue hearing notice to the petitioner through email. The petitioner undertakes not to dispute the validity of the notice. After hearing the petitioner, the second respondent will pass orders in accordance with law. The entire exercise shall be concluded within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The petitioner https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶23

1/2

¶24

2 W.P.(MD)NO.522 OF 2020

¶25

undertakes to extend their fullest co-operation. Since the rectification proceedings have been directed to be concluded within six weeks, the demand set out in the impugned order will be put on hold till then and it would abide by the outcome of the rectification proceedings.

¶26

This writ petition stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition are closed.

¶27

Assistant Registrar (crl.side)

¶28

// True Copy //

¶29

/ /2020 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶30

pmu

¶31

Note : In view of the present lock down owing to COVID19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

¶32

To:

¶33

The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, O/o the Principal and Special Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005.

¶34

The Commercial Tax Officer, Karaikudi Assessment Circle, Commercial Tax Office, No.50/52, Jawahar Street, Karaikudi – 630 001.

¶35

W.P.(MD)No.522 of 2020

¶36

13.08.2020

¶37

KB(26.08.2020) 2P 3C

¶38

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

¶39

2/2

Tvl Sri Meenakshi Bikes v. the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tvl Sri Meenakshi Bikes v. the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes

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

A.Nagalingam Vs Sakkarai Ammal

M. Thangappa Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

P.Balamurugan Vs the Assistant Executive Engineer

P.Shanmugam Vs the District Collector

I.Kumarasamy, Vs the District Collector

Pandiammal Vs the Commissioner Cum Tender Inviting Authority