Disposed

M/s.Sujana Towers Limited v. The Assistant Commissioner(Ct)

Madras HC3 Mar 2021WP/1577/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Common order closing two Writ Petitions filed under Article 226. The petitions were closed due to the appointment of a resolution professional and the active consideration of a takeover proposal, with liberty to restore if the company is revived by NCLT.

What did the court decide?

The writ petitions were closed for the present with liberty to restore subject to the outcome of NCLT proceedings.

M/s.Sujana Towers Limited Vs The Assistant… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 03.03.2021 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN

¶2

W.P.Nos.1577 & 4263 of 2015 and M.P.Nos.2 & 2 of 2015 (Through Video Conferencing)

¶3

M/s. Sujana Towers Limited, Rep. by its Manager – S.Kannan, Plot No.MF-7, 2^nd Floor, CIPET Hostel Road, TVK Industrial Estate, Ekkattuthangal, Chennai 600 097. ... Petitioner in W.P.No.1577/15

¶4

M/s. Sujana Metal Products Ltd., Rep. by its Manager – G.Jayan, MF-7, CIPET Hostel Road, 2^nd Floor, TVK Industrial Estate, Ekkatuthangal, Guindy, Chennai 600 032. ... Petitioner in W.P.No.4263/15 Vs.

¶5

The Assistant Commissioner (CT), Guindy Assessment Circle, Greenways Road, Chennai – 600 028. ... Respondent in W.P.No.1577/15

¶6

The Assistant Commissioner (CT) (FAC), Egmore Assessment Circle, Chennai 600 031. ... Respondent in W.P.No.4263/15

¶7

Prayer in W.P.No.1577 of 2015:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarifi, calling for the records of the respondent in impugned proceedings in TIN: 33230542001/ 2013-14 dated 22.12.2014 quash the same in so far as it seeks to reverse ITC being illegal and contrary to the provisions of Section 19(10) (a) of TNVAT Act, 2006 and Rule 10(2) of TNVAT Rules, 2007.

¶8

Prayer in W.P.No.4263 of 2015:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarifi, calling for the records on the file of the respondent in TIN/33841502596/2010-11 dated 30.12.2014 quash the same as being contrary to law.

¶9

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

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Rajasekar

¶11

in both W.Ps.

¶12

For Respondent : Mr.G.Dhanamadhiri

¶13

Gov. Adv. in both W.Ps.

¶14

C O M M O N O R D E R

¶15

When these cases are taken up for hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that resolution professional has been appointed and the resolution professional is in charge of the petitioner. However, the resolution professional is not present before this Court.

¶16

He further submits that the committee of creditors has given a proposal to take over the petitioner company. However, the said proposal is under active consideration.

¶17

Under these circumstances, these Writ Petitions are closed for the present with liberty to restore the same subject to the outcome of the proceedings before the NCLT. In case the petitioner company is ordered to be revived by NCLT, the petitioner may approach with appropriate application for restoration of this Writ Petition on the file of this Court. No cost. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.

¶18

Sd/Assistant Registrar (CS-V) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar jen To

¶19

1.The Assistant Commissioner (CT),

¶20

Guindy Assessment Circle, Greenways Road, Chennai – 600 028.

¶21

2.The Assistant Commissioner (CT) (FAC),

¶22

Egmore Assessment Circle, Chennai 600 031.

¶23

+1cc to the Special Government Pleader(Taxes), S.R.No.14022, 14021

¶24

W.P.Nos.1577 & 4263 of 2015 and M.P.Nos.2 & 2 of 2015

¶25

PL(CO) GN(30/03/2021)

¶26

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

M/s.Sujana Towers Limited v. The Assistant Commissioner(Ct)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s.Sujana Towers Limited v. The Assistant Commissioner(Ct)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

T.K.Rajalakshmi, Vs The Deputy Commissioner of

M/s.Indian Christian Outreach Vs Commissioner of Customs

S.Venkatajalapathy Vs The Commercial Tax Officer

Tmt. Rani Mohan, Vs The Senior Accounts Officer

Amar Singh Agarwal Vs Assistant Commissioner

M/s.Winndsor Cotton Mills (P) Vs The Assistant Commissioner(Ct)