M/S.Sri Ramajeyam Spintex v. Tamil Nadu Electricity
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court set aside a demand notice issued by the Assistant Audit Officer imposing a penalty for audit short levy, holding that no opportunity was afforded to the petitioner to show cause before the demand was made.
What did the court decide?
Impugned demand notice dated 31.08.2015 set aside; fourth respondent allowed to issue show cause notice. Writ Petition disposed of.
What the court decided
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 13.11.2024
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.KUMARESH BABU
W.P.(MD)No.17403 of 2015 and
M.P(MD)No.1 of 2015
M/s.Sri Ramajayam Spintext (P) Limited, Represented by its Managing Director K.B.Thulasi Ramaraja, HTSC No.188, 445, Kothankulam Village, Srivilliputhur Road, Rajapalayam – 626 117.
... Petitioner
Vs
1.Tamil Nadu Electricity Regulatory Commission represented by its Secretary, 19-A, Rukmini lakshmipathy Salai, Egmore, Chennai – 600 008.
2.The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited, 144, Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002.
3.The Director(Finance), Accounts Branch, Revenue Division, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited, 144, Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the demand notice for audit short levy violates the principles of natural justice.
Whether the fourth respondent was required to issue a show cause notice before imposing the demand.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
M/s. Sri Ramajayam Spintext (P) Limited
- respondent
Tamil Nadu Electricity Regulatory Commission
- respondent
The Chairman, TANGEDCO
- respondent
The Director(Finance), TANGEDCO
- respondent
The Superintending Engineer, Virudhunagar Electricity Distribution Circle
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court