← Library
Madras High CourtWP/32482/2017dismissed

S.Rajagopal & Co., v. The Commercial Tax Officer,

2017-12-14Honourable Mr Justice T. S. Sivagnanam3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 14.12.2017

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM W.P.Nos.32482 and 32483 of 2017 and W.M.P.Nos.35801 to 35804 of 2017 S.Rajagopal & Co., Rep. by its Partner No.43, 7th East Main Road, Gandhi Nagar, Vellore - 632 006, Vellore District.

.. Petitioner in both W.Ps.

..Vs..

The Commercial Tax Officer, Gudiyatham (East) Circle, Gudiyatham, Vellore District.

.. Respondent in both W.Ps.

Prayer in W.P.No.32482 of 2017: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records on the file of the respondent in his impugned proceedings made in TIN No.33494240856/2014-2015 dated 10.08.2017, quash the same as illegal and contrary to the scheme of the Act. Prayer in W.P.No.32483 of 2017: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records on the file of the respondent in his impugned proceedings made in TIN No.33494240856/2015-2016 dated 10.08.2017, quash the same as illegal and contrary to the scheme of the Act. For Petitioner in both W.Ps.

: Mr.S.Rajasekar For Respondent in both W.Ps.

: Mr.K.Venkatesh Government Advocate COMMON ORDER Heard Mr.S.Rajasekar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.K.Venkatesh, learned Government Advocate

appearing for the respondent. With the consent on either side, the writ petitions are taken up for disposal. 2.The petitioner who is the registered dealer on the file of the respondent under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 (TNVAT Act) is before this Court challenging the assessment orders for the assessment year 2014-2015 and 2015-2016 under the TNVAT Act. On a perusal of the impugned order, I find that the Assessing Officer has given sufficient reasons and in fact whenever documents were produced by the petitioner, the same has been taken into consideration and relief has been granted to the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner cannot state that the impugned order is wholly unsustainable.

3.Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that opportunity of personal hearing was not granted. 4.Firstly, in the objections filed by the petitioner dated 09.08.2017 to the show cause notice dated 12.06.2017, the petitioner did not specifically speak for an opportunity of personal hearing. Though the statute mandates, unless the petitioner shows that he has been prejudiced on account of the non-granting of personal hearing merely on that technical ground alone, the impugned order cannot be interfered with. This is more so because the respondent has given the relief to the petitioner by accepting the TDS certificates which was produced on verification found to be correct.

With regard to the sale of sand, bricks and jally made from an unregistered dealers, the Assessing Officer has observed that the dealers have reported the output turnover and there is no variation between the purchase and sales turnover. Similarly, with regard to the mismatch on purchase ITC, purchase bills were verified and the stand taken by the petitioner was accepted. The only thing that was held against the petitioner was with regard to claim for exemption. Therefore, it cannot be said that merely because personal hearing was not afforded to the petitioner, they were put to any prejudice. With regard to the other issues which the petitioner seek to canvass, these are all issues which can be canvassed before the appellate authority which remedy is not only efficacious but also effective.

5.Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as not maintainable. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to prefer an appeal before the appellate authority and if such appeal is filed within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, the appellate authority shall consider the same and pass orders on merits and in accordance

with law without rejecting the same on the ground of limitation. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

cse Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS III) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar To The Commercial Tax Officer, Gudiyatham (East) Circle, Gudiyatham, Vellore District.

+1cc to Government Pleader sR.No.89488 +1cc to Ms.R.Hemalatha, Advocate SR.No.89899 W.P.Nos.32482 and 32483 of 2017 and W.M.P.Nos.35801 to 35804 of 2017 sm:5.1.2018