Allowed

Universal Conveyors v. The State Tax officer

Madras HC13 Oct 2023WP/7180/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court set aside the respondent's assessment order which reversed input tax credit under the Central Sales Tax Act, holding the Appellate Authority erred in reversing credit not extended under that Act, preserving respondent's right to rectify under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order setting aside reversal of input tax credit under the CST Act is quashed; respondent may reverse credit under TNVAT Act if warranted.

Universal Conveyors Vs The State Tax officer — Cheque Dishonour | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P. No.7180 of 2021

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 13.10.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ

¶6

W.P. No.7180 of 2021 and W.M.P. No.7694 of 2021

¶7

Universal Conveyors, Rep. by its Proprietor, Door No.26, Rajeswari Layout, Begapalli Village Post, Hosur - 635 126.

¶8

... Petitioner Vs.

¶9

The State Tax Officer, Hosur [North] -I, Hosur. ... Respondent

¶10

PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records of the respondent in CST No.448222/2016-17 dated 18-01-2021 and quash the same.

¶11

For Petitioner : Ms.Mansi Sethiya Jain for Mr.Adithya Reddy

¶12

For Respondents : Mr.C.Harsha Raj Additional Government Pleader

¶13

ORDER

¶14

This writ petition has been filed challenging the order under the Central

¶15

Sales Tax Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as "the CST Act") for the assessment year 2016-2017 dated 18.01.2021 on the premise that the Appellate Authority has 1/4

¶16

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶17

W.P. No.7180 of 2021 proceeded to reverse the input tax credit on a gross misconception that the benefit of the input tax credit is extended under the CST Act.

¶18

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that input tax credit is extended only under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as the TNVAT Act). It is submitted that there is no provision under the CST Act extending the benefit of input tax credit. It was thus submitted that the reversal of input tax credit in an assessment under the CST Act suffers from error apparent on the face of the record.

¶19

3. The learned counsel for the Respondent would submit that a counter has been filed and being an order of assessment, there is an alternate remedy and therefore there is no reason to bypass the same. This Court is conscious of the fact that writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India would not be exercised in a routine manner. However, existence of alternate remedy is not an embargo or an absolute bar to exercise power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India but a self-imposed restriction and the following circumstances viz., violation of principles of natural justice or bad for want of

¶20

2/4

¶21

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶22

W.P. No.7180 of 2021 jurisdiction or error apparent on the face of the record are some of the

¶23

exceptions carved out to the rule of alternate remedy for exercise of discretion under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

¶24

4. Keeping the above aspect in mind, this Court is of the view that the impugned order suffers from error apparent on the face of the record inasmuch as there is merit in the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that any reversal of credit has to be made only under the TNVAT Act and not under the CST Act.

¶25

5. In view of the above, the impugned order is set aside insofar as it reverses the credit in an assessment order under the CST Act. It is always open to the Respondent to reverse the credit, if so warranted under the provisions of the TNVAT Act, in accordance with law. The writ petition stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶26

13.10.2023

¶27

Speaking (or) Non Speaking Order Index:Yes/No Neutral Citation: Yes/No 3/4

¶28

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶29

W.P. No.7180 of 2021

¶30

spp/mka

¶31

MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J.

¶32

spp/mka

¶33

To: The State Tax Officer, Hosur [North] -I, Hosur.

¶34

W.P. No.7180 of 2021

¶35

13.10.2023

¶36

4/4

¶37

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Universal Conveyors v. The State Tax officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Universal Conveyors v. The State Tax officer

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

M/s.Welcord Component Industries Vs The Assistant Commissioner

Rikhabchand Vinod Kumar Vs The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1

Tvl.N.R.Electricals Vs The State Tax officer (Additional)

Veena Bajaj Vs Deputy Commissioner of income tax

Veena Bajaj Vs Deputy Commissioner of income tax

Dr. Chellappanpillai Sreekumar Vs Additional/ Joint/ Deputy/ Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax/