Dismissed

E.Chandran v. The Assistant Commissioner(Ct)

Madras HC20 Sept 2024WP/1097/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Proprietor challenged GST recovery notices arising from a Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal order for assessment years 2002-03 to 2005-06 without challenging the Tribunal's order. The court dismissed the writ petition but kept recovery in abeyance for six weeks, permitting appeal against the Tribunal order.

What did the court decide?

Recovery proceedings kept in abeyance for six weeks; writ petition dismissed with no costs and connected miscellaneous petitions closed.

E.Chandran Vs The Assistant Commissioner(Ct) — GST and Indirect Tax | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P.No.1097 of 2021

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 20.09.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN

¶6

W.P.No.1097 of 2021

¶7

and

¶8

W.M.P.Nos.1213 and 1214 of 2021

E.Chandran

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Assistant Commissioner (CT), Thiruvanmiyur Assessment Circle, No.191, Firat Main Road, Burma Colony,

¶13

Perungudi, Chennai – 600 096.

¶14

2.The State Tax Officer,

¶15

O/o.The Assistant Commissioner (ST), Thiruvanmiyur Assessment Circle, Perungudi,

¶16

Chennai – 600 096. ... Respondents

¶17

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records of the proceedings in Notice No.RC/1902/2006/B1 dated 01.04.2019 on the file of the 1^st respondent and the consequential notices sent by the 2^nd

¶18

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

¶19

1/5

¶20

W.P.No.1097 of 2021

¶21

respondent in Notice No.TNGST/0922799/2002-03 to 2005-06 dated 02.08.2019 and 31.10.2019 respectively and to quash the same as illegal and without jurisdiction.

¶22

For Petitioner : Mr.G.Harshavarthan for Mr.Govind Chandrasekhar

¶23

For Respondents : Mr.TNC.Kaushik Additional Government Pleader

¶24

ORDER

¶25

This writ petition is directed against the recovery proceedings initiated against the petitioner who was the proprietor of M/s.Excel Fab. It appears to be pursuant to an order passed by the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal (Main Bench) in S.T.A.No.202/2007 reversing the order passed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner (CT) – Kancheepuram in A.P.No.150/2005 dated 06.06.2006, relating to the Assessment Years 2003-2004 under the TNGST Act, 1959. The recovery notice that has been issued against the petitioner also pertains to the alleged pay drawn arrears of the tax for the other Assessment Years 2003-04, 2004-05 and 2005-06. It is not clear whether any adverse orders has been passed against the petitioner for these Assessment Years

¶26

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

¶27

2/5

¶28

W.P.No.1097 of 2021

¶29

by the Tribunal. The petitioner had secured an interim order on 21.01.2021 at the time of admission of this writ petition. Since the Tribunal has passed orders mentioned above against the petitioner, Court is inclined to dismiss this Writ Petition. However, the recovery proceedings is directed to be kept in abeyance for a period of six weeks from today. It is open for the petitioner to challenge the order passed by the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal in S.T.A.No.202/2007 for the Assessment Year 2002-2003. It is also open for the petitioner to obtain orders which may have been passed either by the Appellate Commissioner or by the Tribunal for the succeeding Assessment Years and take up an appeal before the Appellate Authority.

¶30

It is made clear that recovery proceedings will be kept in abeyance only for a period of six weeks alone and thereafter it is open for the Commercial Tax Department to proceed against the petitioner, in case, the petitioner fails to obtain interim protection from the Appellate Authority.

¶31

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

¶32

3/5

¶33

W.P.No.1097 of 2021

¶34

This Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently,

¶35

connected writ miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶36

20.09.2024

¶37

Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order Neutral Citation : Yes/No jas To

¶38

1.The Assistant Commissioner (CT), Thiruvanmiyur Assessment Circle, No.191, Firat Main Road, Burma Colony, Perungudi, Chennai – 600 096.

¶39

2.The State Tax Officer, O/o.The Assistant Commissioner (ST), Thiruvanmiyur Assessment Circle, Perungudi, Chennai – 600 096.

¶40

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

¶41

4/5

¶42

W.P.No.1097 of 2021

C.SARAVANAN, J.

jas

W.P.No.1097 of 2021

and W.M.P.Nos.1213 and 1214 of 2021

¶47

20.09.2024

¶48

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

¶49

5/5

E.Chandran v. The Assistant Commissioner(Ct)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

E.Chandran v. The Assistant Commissioner(Ct)

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

Mr. Radhakrishnan Dharmarajan Vs The Joint Commissioner of Customs

Mr. Radhakrishnan Dharmarajan Vs The Joint Commissioner of Customs

Mr. Radhakrishnan Dharmarajan Vs The Joint Commissioner of Customs

Hyundai Motor India Ltd. Vs The Additional Director General (Adjudication)

M/s.Senthil Textiles Vs The Assistant Commissioner (St)

Gks Technology Park Private Limited Vs The Assistant Commissioner of Income tax