Allowed

TamilNadu Generation and Distriction Corporation Ltd., v. The Assistant Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise

Madras HC7 Jul 2021WP/34305/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed an order demanding tax without hearing. It remanded the matter for fresh consideration, granting the petitioner eight weeks to submit explanations and documents for a personal hearing before a final order.

What did the court decide?

Quashed final order; remanded for fresh consideration with opportunity of personal hearing and submissions within eight weeks.

TamilNadu Generation and Distriction Corporation Ltd… — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 07.07.2021

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

¶5

W.P.No.34305 of 2018 and W.M.P.No.39876 of 2018

¶6

Tamil Nadu Generation and

¶7

Distribution Corporation Ltd., (TANGEDCO), Urachikottai, Rep. By its Superintending Engineer, Barrage IV Campus, Urachikottai, Bhavani. ..Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

The Assistant Commissioner of

¶10

Central GST & Central Excise, Erode – II Division, No.81, Bharathi Nagar, Soolai, Erode 638 004. ..Respondent

¶11

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Prohibition, prohibiting the respondent from proceeding further, pursuant to the impugned Order in Original No.19/2018(AC/Erode-II) dated 31.10.2018 issued by the respondent as the demand is barred by limitation, without jurisdiction, arbitrary and not sustainable in law.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Jayachandran

¶13

For Respondent : Mr.A.P.Srinivas (Senior Standing Counsel)

¶14

ORDER

¶15

The present Writ Petition is filed challenging the Order-inOriginal passed by the respondent on 31.10.2018.

¶16

2.The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner has not submitted their explanation or defence statement and requested time on the ground that some Writ Petitions are pending. However, without granting any further time, the respondent has passed the final order and therefore, the writ petitioner is constrained to move the present Writ Petition.

¶17

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

¶18

3.This Court has dealt with the other Writ Petitions, filed quashing the show cause notices issued, and a direction is issued to complete the exercise by providing an opportunity to the writ petitioners.

¶19

4.The learned counsel for the petitioner made a submission that in view of the pendency of the Writ Petitions questioning the authority of the respondents demanding Service Tax to be paid by the petitioners, the petitioner has not submitted their defence statement, nor produced any documents, enabling the authority to consider the issues. However, the final order impugned is passed unilaterally without considering any of the points in favour of the petitioner. Thus, the matters are to be remanded back.

¶20

5.This Court is of the considered opinion that in all other Writ Petitions where the show cause notices are questioned before this Court, this Court passed an order, directing the petitioners to submit explanations and by following the procedures as contemplated under the Act, the final order is to be passed. In view of the said order, the present Writ Petition is also to be remanded back for a fresh consideration by the authorities.

¶21

6.Accordingly, the impugned Order-in-Original, passed by the respondent in proceedings No.19/2018(AC/Erode-II) dated 31.10.2018 is quashed and the matter is remanded back to the respondent for fresh consideration by providing an opportunity to the writ petitioner to submit their explanations, documents and evidences and by affording opportunity of personal hearing and thereafter, pass final orders in the manner known to law.

¶22

7.In this regard, the petitioner is directed to submit their explanations, documents, evidences, as well as the legal grounds, if any, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and on receipt of any such explanations, documents and evidences, the respondent is directed to provide opportunity to the petitioner, including personal hearing and thereafter, consider the issues, take a decision and pass final orders as expeditiously as possible.

¶23

8.With these directions, the Writ Petition stands allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶24

Sd/Assistant Registrar(CS-III)

¶25

//True Copy//

¶26

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶27

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

¶28

gsa

¶29

¶30

The Assistant Commissioner of Central GST & Central Excise, Erode – II Division, No.81, Bharathi Nagar, Soolai, Erode 638 004.

¶31

W.P.No.34305 of 2018

¶32

PCH(CO) CB(02/08/2021)

¶33

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

TamilNadu Generation and Distriction Corporation Ltd., v. The Assistant Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

TamilNadu Generation and Distriction Corporation Ltd., v. The Assistant Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Bismillah Industrial Steel Vs the Commercial Tax Officer

M/S.K.K.Poly Colour India Ltd. Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

M/S.Subbaraya Aiyar Vs the Union of India

Mr.Kavin Kumar Kandaswamy Vs The Chief Commissioner of

S.Aftab Ahamed Vs Income Tax Officer

M/S. Aircel Limited, Vs Union of India