Disposed

Tvl Lakshmi Paints Stores v. the State of Tamilnadu

Madras HC12 Dec 2024WP/32928/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of two writ petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging a tax assessment order and the retrospective operation of a tax amendment. Upon receiving a letter from the petitioner indicating the death of their counsel and seeking withdrawal, the court dismissed the writ petitions as withdrawn with no order as to costs.

What the court decided

AI extract

Tvl Lakshmi Paints Stores Vs the State of Tamilnadu — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P. Nos.32928 and 32929 of 2013

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 12.12.2024

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. SUNDAR AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR

¶6

W.P. Nos.32928 & 32929 of 2013 and M.P. No.1 of 2013

¶7

Lakshmi Paints Stores represented by its Proprietor V. Prabakaran No.20, Durugam Road Kallakurichi Petitioner in both WPs

¶8

¶9

The State of Tamil Nadu represented by the Secretary to Government Commercial Taxes Department Fort St. George Chennai 600 009

¶10

The Commercial Tax Officer (Main) Kallakurichi Assessment Circle Kallakurichi Respondents in both WPs

¶11

Prayer in W.P. No.32928 of 2013:

¶12

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of declaration declaring that the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax (Fourth Amendment) Act, 2011, being clarificatory and/or declaratory in nature, must have retrospective operation.

¶13

1/6

¶14

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

¶15

W.P. Nos.32928 and 32929 of 2013

¶16

Prayer in W.P. No.32929 of 2013:

¶17

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of certiorari calling for the records in respect of the assessment order TIN 33974780882/2011-12 dated 30.09.2013 passed by the second respondent in respect of the assessment year 2011-2012 under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, and quash the same.

¶18

For petitioner in both WPs No appearance For respondents Mr. G. Nanmaran in both WPs Special Government Pleader

¶19

COMMON ORDER

¶20

(made by M. SUNDAR, J.)

¶21

Captioned 'writ petitions' ('WPs' for the sake of brevity) are listed

¶22

under the cause list caption 'FOR WITHDRAWAL' at the instance of the writ petitioner in both the writ petitions. The writ petitioner in both the captioned

¶23

writ petitions is the same, i.e., Lakshmi Paints Stores and the writ petitioner has addressed a letter to the Registry. This letter has been received by the Registry on 10.12.2024 and the scanned reproduction of the same is as follows:

¶24

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

¶25

2/6

¶26

W.P. Nos.32928 and 32929 of 2013

¶27

3/6

¶28

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

¶29

W.P. Nos.32928 and 32929 of 2013

¶30

We are informed that Mr. S.P. Asokan, learned counsel on

¶31

record for the writ petitioner is no more. Nonetheless, as the writ petitioner has addressed aforementioned letter to the Registry, captioned two WPs are dismissed as withdrawn. There shall be no order as to costs. Captioned M.P. thereat stands closed.

¶32

(M.S., J.) (K.R.S., J.) 12.12.2024

¶33

Index : Yes/No NC : Yes/No cad

¶34

4/6

¶35

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

¶36

W.P. Nos.32928 and 32929 of 2013

¶37

¶38