Dismissed

The State of Tamil Nadu v. Tvl.Cethar Vessels Ltd.

Madras HC3 Jan 2024TC(MD)/13/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This common order dismisses four Tax Cases under Section 38(1) of the TNGST Act, 1959 filed by the State. The High Court held that no substantial questions of law exist as lower authorities reasoned the facts in detail. Consequently, the appeals against the Tribunal's order are dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Tax cases T.C(MD)Nos.13,22,72 of 2009 and TC(MD)No.200 of 2012 are dismissed with no order as to costs.

The State of Tamil Nadu Vs Tvl.Cethar Vessels Ltd. — Income Tax | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶2

DATED : 03.01.2024

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN AND

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN

¶6

T.C(MD)Nos.13,22 and 72 of 2009 and TC(MD)No.200 of 2012

¶7

The State of Tamil Nadu, represented by The Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Tiruchirappalli Division, Tiruchirappalli. ... Petitioner in all Tax Cases

¶8

.Vs.

¶9

TVL.Cethar Vessels Limited, No.6-A, Lawsons Road, Tiruchy ... Respondent in all Tax Cases

¶10

COMMON PRAYER: Tax Cases filed under Section 38(1) of the TNGST Act, 1959 to revise the orders of the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal(Additional Bench)Madurai in M.T.M.P.No.130 of 2003, M.T.A.No.510 of 1995, M.T.A.No.512 of 1995 and M.T.M.P.No.132 of 2003 respectively.

¶11

1/5

¶12

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

¶13

T.C.No.13 of 2009

¶14

For Appellant : Mr.A.K.Manikkam Special Govt.Pleader For Respondent : No appearance

¶15

T.C.No.22 of 2009

¶16

For Appellant : Mr.A.K.Manikkam Special Govt.Pleader For Respondent : Mr.T.Antony Arul Raj

¶17

T.C.Nos.72 of 2009 and 200 of 2012

¶18

For Appellant : Mr.A.K.Manikkam Special Govt.Pleader For Respondent : Mr.S.Karthik for Silambanan Associates

¶19

COMMON ORDER

¶20

DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN,J. AND C.KUMARAPPAN,J.

¶21

These Tax Cases are preferred by the State being aggrieved by the orders passed by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal(Additional Bench),Madurai in M.T.M.P.No.130 of 2003, M.T.A.No.510 of 1995, M.T.A.No.512 of 1995 and

¶22

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

¶23

2/5

¶24

M.T.M.P.No.132 of 2003, dated 14.07.2003.

¶25

2.For the assessment year 1989-90, the assessment of the assessee was revisited by the Assessing Officer and he imposed an additional tax of Rs. 18,77,888/- and penalty of Rs.1,28,51,939/- in T.C.No.13 of 2009 and for the assessment year 1989-90, additional tax of Rs.18,77,888/ and penalty of Rs. 1,28,51,939/- in T.C.No.22 of 2009, and for the assessment year 1987-88, additional tax of Rs.18,77,888/- and penalty of Rs.1,28,51,939/- in T.C.No.72 of 2009, for the assessment year 1987-88, additional tax of Rs.18,77,888/- and penalty of Rs.1,28,51,939/- in T.C.No.200 of 2012. The Petitioner being aggrieved, preferred appeals and the Appellate Authority, Assistant Commissioner vide order, dated 31.03.1990 partly modified and remanded part of the assessment back for reconsideration. The Petitioner preferred Second Appeals before the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madurai. The State also preferred Petition for enhancement and to sustain the remand order.

¶26

3.The Tribunal, on hearing the arguments and on perusal of records, allowed the appeals preferred by the Petitioner and dismissed the prayer for

¶27

3/5

¶28

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

¶29

enhancement filed by the State. Being aggrieved, the present Tax Cases are filed under Section 38(1) of the TNGST Act, 1959.

¶30

4.Perusal of the grounds of these Tax Cases does not disclose any substantial questions of law involved, since both the first appellate authority and the second appellate authority have gone through the facts in detail and given reasoning for their conclusion. Hence these Tax Cases deserves to be dismissed.

¶31

5.Accordingly, these Tax Cases are dismissed. There is no order as to costs.

¶32

[G.J.,J.] [C.K.,J.] 03.01.2024

¶33

NCS : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No vsn

¶34

4/5

¶35

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

¶36

DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN, J. and C.KUMARAPPAN,J.

¶37

vsn

¶38

COMMON ORDER MADE IN

¶39

T.C(MD)Nos.13,22 and 72 of 2009 and TC(MD)No.200 of 2012

¶40

03.01.2024

¶41

5/5

¶42

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

The State of Tamil Nadu v. Tvl.Cethar Vessels Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The State of Tamil Nadu v. Tvl.Cethar Vessels Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The President Vs S.Antonysamy

M.Saraswathy, Vs the Government of Tamilnadu

Thirumalaisamy Vs Rasu

M/S.Mekala Msp Raja Vs the State of Tamil Nadu Rep.by

Tvl.Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Ltd. Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

Shanmugam Vs Saraswathy