Partly allowed

M/S.Talent Alloys (P) Ltd., v. the State of Tamilnadu

Madras HC23 Oct 2024WP/1611/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed W.P.No.1611 of 2012 as the petitioner did not pursue the prayer declaring the electricity tax amendment illegal. In W.P.No.1612 of 2012, the Court restrained respondents from electricity disconnection pending the final outcome of pending Supreme Court civil appeals.

What did the court decide?

WP No.1611 dismissed as not pressed; in WP No.1612, respondents restrained from electricity disconnection pending Supreme Court appeals; liberty granted to revive if order changes.

M/S.Talent Alloys (P) Ltd., Vs the State of… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

2024:MHC:3628

¶2

W.P.Nos.1611 & 1612 of 2012

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶4

DATED: 23.10.2024

¶5

CORAM :

¶6

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G. ARUL MURUGAN

¶7

W.P.Nos. 1611 & 1612 of 2012 and M.P.Nos.1 & 1 of 2012

¶8

M/s.Talent Alloys (P) Ltd.,

¶9

Rep. by the Director,S.F.No.475, Karegoundampalayam, Kariyampalayam, Annur, Coimbatore – 641 653.

¶10

..Petitioner in both WPs

¶11

¶12

1.The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by the Secretary, Department of Energy, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009.

¶13

2.Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution

¶14

Corporation Limited, Rep. by the Chairman,114 (Old 800), Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002.

¶15

3.The Superintending Engineer, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited, Coimbatore Electricity (North) Distribution Circle, Coimbatore-12.

¶16

.. Respondents in both WPs

¶17

Prayer in WP.No.1611 of 2012: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of Declaration declaring that Amendment Act 38 of 2007 – the Tamil Nadu tax on Consumption or Sale of Electricity (Amendment) Act, 2007 so far as levy and collection of electricity tax on demand charges night hour concession and power factor incentive are illegal, unconstitutional and consequentially direct the respondents one to three to refund the electricity tax with interest and pass such other order or direction and render justice.

¶18

Prayer in W.P.No.1612 of 2012: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of Certiorari to call for the records of the third respondent in

¶19

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

¶20

1/5

¶21

W.P.Nos.1611 & 1612 of 2012

¶22

Lr.No.SE/CEDC/N/CBE/DFC/AO/REV/AS/ A2/F.E.Tax D.864/11 Dt. 12.12.2011 and quash the same as illegal and pass such other order or any other order and render justice.

¶23

(In both WPs) For Petitioner : Mr.S.Rajesh For Respondents : Mr.J.Preetham (for R2 & R3) for Mr.L.Jai Venkatesh No Appearance (for R1)

¶24

COMMON ORDER (Order of the Court was made by Dr. ANITA SUMANTH.,J)

¶25

Mr.S.Rajesh, learned counsel on record, makes an endorsement to the effect that the petitioner does not pursue W.P.No.1611 of 2012 seeking a declaration to the effect that Amendment Act 38 of 2007 being the Tamil Nadu Tax on Consumption or Sale of Electricity (Amendment) Act, 2003 insofar it relates to levy and collection of electricity tax on demand charges, night hour concession and power factor incentive is illegal and unconstitutional. Hence, W.P.No.1611 of 2012 is dismissed as not pressed.

¶26

In fact, the petitioner is seen to have filed W.P.No.17268 of 2008 seeking the same declaratory relief and that writ petition, along with a batch of other writ petitions has come to be dismissed by an order of the Division Bench of this Court on 15.06.2012. As against the same, some of the writ petitioners have filed Special Leave Petitions before the Supreme Court in Sri Krishna Alloys etc v Union of India, Department of Energy and ors [C.A.No.011505-011539/2018], pending as of now. The Supreme Court has passed an interim order on

¶27

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

¶28

2/5

¶29

W.P.Nos.1611 & 1612 of 2012

¶30

31.08.2021, in those matter reading thus:-

¶31

“Permission to file SLP in SLP © 15217 of 2012 is granted.

¶32

Issue notice returnable in four weeks.

¶33

In the meantime, the respondents are restrained from taking any coercive steps for disconnecting supply of electricity to petitioner's premises, subject to the petitioner's paying all the charges/dues except the tax calculated on the basis of maximum demand.”

¶34

In light of the same, an order is passed in W.P.No.1612 of 2012 to the effect that the respondents are restrained from taking any coercive steps for disconnection, subject to the petitioner remitting all dues / charges barring the tax calculated on the basis of maximum charges and subject to the result of C.A.No.011505-011539/2018. W.P.No.1612 of 2012 stands disposed and liberty is granted to revive the same, if necessary, based on the orders to be passed in the pending civil appeals in C.A.No.011505-011539/2018. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶35

[A.S.M., J] [G.A.M., J] 23.10.2024

¶36

Index:Yes/No Neutral Citation:Yes ssm To

¶37

1.The Secretary,

¶38

Department of Energy, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009.

¶39

2.The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited,114 (Old 800), Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002.

¶40

3.The Superintending Engineer, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited, Coimbatore Electricity (North) Distribution

¶41

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

¶42

3/5

¶43

W.P.Nos.1611 & 1612 of 2012

¶44

Circle, Coimbatore-12.

¶45

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

¶46

4/5

¶47

W.P.Nos.1611 & 1612 of 2012

¶48

DR. ANITA SUMANTH.,J. and G. ARUL MURUGAN.,J.

¶49

ssm

¶50

W.P.Nos. 1611 & 1612 of 2012 and M.P.Nos.1 & 1 of 2012

¶51

23.10.2024

¶52

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

¶53

5/5

M/S.Talent Alloys (P) Ltd., v. the State of Tamilnadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S.Talent Alloys (P) Ltd., v. the State of Tamilnadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S.Earth Tech Enterprises Ltd. Vs the Assistant Commercial Tax

Indian Rayon and Industries Vs the Commercial Tax Officer

M/S.Cochin Plantations Ltd., Vs the Commercial Tax Officer(Dg)

Nupur Impex Vs Customs, Excise

Shah Ramratan Narsingdass Vs the Deputy Commercial Tax

Albert Theatre, Vs The Special Commissioner of