Disposed

K.T.R.C. Ramalingam v. the Jurisdictional Commissioner

Madras HC12 Mar 2024WA/743/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ appeal against dismissal of a petition challenging a GST assessment order that directed the appellant to the appellate remedy. The High Court disposed of the appeal directing that any appeal filed within four weeks be entertained without limitation and decided purely on merits, free of the Single Judge's observations.

What did the court decide?

Appeal to be entertained without reference to limitation if filed within four weeks and decided by Appellate Authority purely on merits.

K.T.R.C. Ramalingam Vs the Jurisdictional Commissioner — GST and Indirect Tax | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.A.No.743 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 12.03.2024

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S. SUNDAR

¶6

AND

¶7

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. SENTHILKUMAR

¶8

W.A.No.743 of 2024

¶9

and

¶10

C.M.P.No.4986 of 2024

¶11

K.T.R.C.Ramalingam Trading as K.T.R. Modern Rice Mill No.81/D, Enthuvambadi Road, Kalambur, Polur Taluk – 606 903, Tiruvannamalai District. ... Appellant Vs.

¶12

1.The Jurisdictional Commissioner, Central GST, Chennai. 2.The State Tax Officer, Polur, Tiruvannamalai District. ... Respondents

¶13

Prayer : Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, against the order of this Court dated 24.07.2023 in W.P.No.9376 of 2021.

¶14

Page 1

¶15

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

¶16

W.A.No.743 of 2024

¶17

For Appellant	: Mr.Adithya Reddy
For R1	: Mr.Rajendran Raghavan Senior Panel Counsel
For R2	: Mr.C.Harsha Raj
	Additional Government Pleader

¶18

J U D G M E N T

¶19

(Judgment was delivered by S.S. SUNDAR, J. )

¶20

This writ appeal is directed against the order of the learned Single Judge, dated 24.07.2023, dismissing the writ petition in W.P.No.9376 of 2021, challenging the impugned Assessment Order dated 05.03.2021, only on the ground that the petitioner should avail the alternative remedy of appeal within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.

¶21

2.Learned counsel appearing for the appellant states that the appellant is aggrieved by the order of the learned Single Judge, as the learned Single Judge has also considered the merits of the claim of the appellant, while dismissing the writ petition.

¶22

Page 2

¶23

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

¶24

W.A.No.743 of 2024

¶25

3.Having regard to the factual observations of the learned Single Judge that ultimately the issues involve disputed questions of fact, it will be appropriate for the Appellate Authority to decide the issues on merits. In view of the apprehension of the learned counsel for the appellant, this Court is inclined to direct that the Appellate Authority shall consider the appeal to be filed by the writ petitioner, purely on merits, uninfluenced by any of the observations or findings of the learned Single Judge on the merits of the appellant's claim.

¶26

4.While disposing of the writ petition, the learned Single Judge also gave four weeks' time from the date of receipt of the order to file an appeal so that the appeal will be entertained without reference to limitation. This Court now expects the appellant to file an appeal within four weeks from this date. In case an appeal is filed within four weeks from today, the appeal shall be entertained without reference to limitation and the Appellate Authority shall pass orders on the appeal on its own merits and in accordance with law.

¶27

Page 3

¶28

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

¶29

W.A.No.743 of 2024

¶30

5.With the above observations, this writ appeal is disposed of. No

¶31

costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶32

(S.S.S.R., J.) (N.S., J.) 12.03.2024

¶33

mkn

¶34

Internet : Yes Index : Yes / No Neutral Citation : Yes / No

¶35

¶36

1.The Jurisdictional Commissioner, Central GST, Chennai.

¶37

2.The State Tax Officer,

¶38

Polur, Tiruvannamalai District.

¶39

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

¶40

Page 4

¶41

W.A.No.743 of 2024

¶42

S.S. SUNDAR, J. and N. SENTHILKUMAR, J.

¶43

mkn

¶44

W.A.No.743 of 2024

¶45

12.03.2024

¶46

Page 5

¶47

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

K.T.R.C. Ramalingam v. the Jurisdictional Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.T.R.C. Ramalingam v. the Jurisdictional Commissioner

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

D.Sasikala Vs the Principal Secretary

V.Ramesh Vs Sri Ganesh Flats Owners Association

D.Jayakumar Vs the Chairman

P.Kishore Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

V.Amuthavalli Vs the Commissioner

Amjath Khan Vs the Commissioner