Allowed

Arun Textiles Private Ltd. v. Tamilnadu Electricity Board

Madras HC29 Jan 2024WP/14545/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court allowed four writ petitions filed by textile mills challenging the levy and collection of a belated payment surcharge on electricity tax arrears. Relying on a prior Division Bench order and a Supreme Court ruling, the court declared the demand arbitrary and unlawful, quashing the specific letters of demand issued by the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board.

What did the court decide?

The impugned orders passed by the respondent in the letters of demand dated 28.10.2006 and 05.04.2007 stand quashed. These writ petitions are allowed.

Arun Textiles Private Ltd. Vs Tamilnadu Electricity… — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P.Nos.14545 to 14548 of 2007

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 29.01.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

¶6

W.P.Nos.14545 to 14548 of 2007 and

¶7

M.P.Nos.1,1,1 and 1 of 2007

¶8

W.P.No.14545 of 2007

¶9

Arun Textiles Private Limited

¶10

... Petitioner

¶11

Vs.

¶12

The Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, represented by its Chairman, 800, Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002.

¶13

The Superintending Engineer, Gobi Electricity Distribution Circle, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Gobichettipalayam. ... Respondents

¶14

Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Declaration, declaring the levy, demand and collection of belated payment surcharge on the electricity tax arrears by the respondent vide Letter No.A/cs./Br/DFC/HT/AS/A1/F.HT.SC NO.33/2006 dated 28.10.2006 as arbitrary, unlawful and ultra vires the Constitution of India.

¶15

Page 1 of 8

¶16

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

¶17

W.P.Nos.14545 to 14548 of 2007

¶18

W.P.No.14546 of 2007

¶19

Dindigul Cotton Textile Mills (p) ltd.,

¶20

... Petitioner

¶21

Vs.

¶22

The Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, represented by its Chairman, 800, Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002.

¶23

The Superintending Engineer, Dindigul Electricity Distribution Circle, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Dindigul. ... Respondents

¶24

Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Declaration, declaring the levy, demand and collection of belated payment surcharge on the electricity tax arrears by the respondent vide Letter No.SE/DEDC/DGL/AO/R/AS/JA/F.E-Tax/D.NO.926/07 dated 05.04.2007 as arbitrary, unlawful and ultra vires the Constitution of India.

¶25

W.P.No.14547 of 2007

¶26

Angu Parameswari Textile Mills (p) ltd.,

¶27

... Petitioner

¶28

Vs.

¶29

The Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, represented by its Chairman, 800, Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002.

¶30

Page 2 of 8

¶31

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

¶32

W.P.Nos.14545 to 14548 of 2007

¶33

The Superintending Engineer, Dindigul Electricity Distribution Circle, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Dindigul. ... Respondents

¶34

Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Declaration, declaring the levy, demand and collection of belated payment surcharge on the electricity tax arrears by the respondent vide Letter No.SE/DEDC/DGL/AO/R/AS/JA/F.E-Tax/D.NO.926/07 dated 05.04.2007 as arbitrary, unlawful and ultra vires the Constitution of India.

¶35

W.P.No.14548 of 2007

¶36

Palmar Mills (p) ltd., Unit II

¶37

... Petitioner

¶38

Vs.

¶39

The Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, represented by its Chairman, 800, Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002.

¶40

The Superintending Engineer, Dindigul Electricity Distribution Circle, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Dindigul. ... Respondents

¶41

Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Declaration, declaring the levy, demand and collection of belated payment surcharge on the electricity tax arrears by the respondent vide Letter No.SE/DEDC/DGL/AO/R/AS/JA/F.E-Tax/D.NO.926/07 dated 05.04.2007 as arbitrary, unlawful and ultra vires the Constitution of India.

¶42

Page 3 of 8

¶43

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

¶44

W.P.Nos.14545 to 14548 of 2007

¶45

For Petitioners : Mr.S.P.Parthasarathy (in all W.Ps) For Respondents : Mr.I.Syed Sibghatulla, SC for TANGEDCO (in all W.Ps)

¶46

C O M M O N O R D E R

¶47

The writ of declaration is filed in the present writ petitions to declare the levy, demand and collection of Belated Payment Surcharge on the electricity tax arrears by the respondents.

¶48

The petitioners levied electricity tax in two stages, viz., 5% tax on of consumption of electricity under the provisions of the 32 of 1991, ie., the amended Act 4 of 1962 called the Tamil Nadu Tax on Electricity (Taxation on Consumption) Act, 1962 of 15.06.2003. Again from 16.06.2003, the Government levied electricity tax at the rate of 5% tax on the consumption or sale of electricity under Act 12 of 2003, viz., Tamil Nadu Tax on Consumption or Sale of Electricity Act, 2003.(Act 12 of 2003)

¶49

The issue in this regard, in the matter of demand and collection of

¶50

Page 4 of 8

¶51

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

¶52

W.P.Nos.14545 to 14548 of 2007

¶53

belated payment of surcharge is no more res integra and the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court passed an order in Writ Appeal M.D.No.1590 of 2011, dated 22.12.2011, its relevant paragraphs are extracted as under:

¶54

“21. In short, on a consideration of the

¶55

entire facts and circumstances of the present case in an integral fashion, this Court comes to an inescapable conclusion that the Appellant/Respondent is not entitled to levy any surcharge on the Belated Payment of Electricity Tax (based on the facts and circumstances which float on the surface, in the case before Court). Therefore, this Court holds that the Learned Single Judge has rightly allowed the writ petition and further, set aside the demand of the respondent in collecting the Belated payment of Surcharge on the payment of arrears of Rs.2,34.308/-

¶56

alone which are perfectly valid in the eye of

¶57

Page 5 of 8

¶58

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

¶59

W.P.Nos.14545 to 14548 of 2007

¶60

law.

¶61

22. In short, the order of the learned Single Judge while allowing the writ petition as referred to supra, does not suffer from any material irregularity or patent illegality. As such, the said order does not require any interference in the hands of this Court.

¶62

23. Resultantly, the Writ Appeal is devoid of merits. Accordingly, the same is dismissed, leaving the parties to bear their own costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is also dismissed.”

¶63

The order of the Hon'ble Division Bench was confirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in SLA(C) No.12282 of 2014 dated 01.03.2016. In view of the orders of the Division Bench and the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, the

¶64

impugned orders passed by the respondent in Letter

¶65

Page 6 of 8

¶66

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

¶67

W.P.Nos.14545 to 14548 of 2007

¶68

No.A/cs./Br/DFC/HT/AS/A1/F.HT.SC NO.33/2006 dated 28.10.2006 and Letter No.SE/DEDC/DGL/AO/R/AS/JA/F.E-Tax/D.NO.926/07 dated 05.04.2007 stand quashed.

¶69

5.Accordingly, these writ petitions stand allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.