← Library
Madras High CourtWP/12695/2017disposed of

Sri Munipachaiyappan Taxtiles v. The Commercial Tax Officer

2017-05-17Honourable Mr Justice R. Mahadevan3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 17.05.2017

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN W.P.No.12695 of 2017 and W.M.P.No.13519 of 2017 Sri Munipachaiyappan Textiles Private Ltd., Iyepedu Village, Sholinghur-631 102, Vellore District.

Rep.by its Managing Director .. Petitioner Vs The Commercial Tax Officer, Arakkonam Assessment Circle, Arakkonam-631 008.

.. Respondent Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of order under reference TIN NO/33581740583/13-14 dated 13.02.2017 passed by the respondent and culminating the order in TIN NO/33581740583/13-14 dated 02.05.2017, quash the same as illegal and arbitrary and direct the respondent to pass fresh orders by providing personal hearing to the petitioner and consider removal of erroneous tax claims.

For Petitioner : Mr.N.Senthil Kumar For Respondent : Mr.S.Kanmani Annamalai, Additional Government Pleader (Taxes)

ORDER

This writ petition is filed to quash the orders passed by the respondent in TIN NO/33581740583/13-14 dated 13.02.2017 and in TIN NO/33581740583/13-14 dated 02.05.2017 as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the respondent to pass fresh orders by providing personal hearing to the petitioner and considering removal of erroneous tax claims.

2.In the affidavit filed in support of this writ petition, it is stated that the petitioner is the manufacturer of

synthetic yarn and a registered dealer under TNVAT Act, 2006 and CST Act, 1956 and also an assessee in the respondent assessment circle. The petitioner states that the respondent passed the reassessment order dated 13.02.2017 for the assessment year 2013-14 under Section 27(1)(a) of the TNVAT Act, 2006 and the same was received by the petitioner on 02.03.2017. According to the petitioner, the said reassessment order suffers from errors apparent on the face of the record requiring rectification under Section 84 of the TNVAT Act. The petitioner submitted a letter dated 20.03.2017 in this connection, requesting the respondent to rectify the errors and issue revised order nullifying the demand of tax and penalty raised therein.

The petitioner's representative also appeared before the respondent's office in person and explained the matter in detail. Thereafter, since there was no communication from the respondent for about 6 months, the petitioner thought that the assessing officer had dropped the proposal after verifying the representation made by the petitioner. But to the shock and surprise of the petitioner, the impugned orders came to be passed confirming the levy of tax at 14.5% on the purchase value of Rs.23,46,145/-. Further, in addition to the levy of tax, penalty at 100% of the tax due was also levied. Hence this writ petition.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that if the assessing officer had conducted enquiry as provided under Section 27(1)(a) of the TNVAT Act, by providing an opportunity to the petitioner, the petitioner would have established the payment of tax on the impugned transactions with relevant materials. Stating so, he prayed for quashing the impugned orders.

4.Mr.S.Kanmani Annamalai, learned Additional Government Pleader, took notice for the respondent and submitted that the impugned orders have been passed after considering all the aspects and the same does not require any interference by this Court.

5.Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

6.It is seen from the records that without giving an opportunity to file objections to the notice, the impugned orders came to be passed on 13.02.2017 and 02.05.2017. Such sort of practice by the assessing authority cannot be countenanced. The authority has to provide adequate opportunity to the petitioner for filing objections to the notice. Without giving opportunity, the impugned orders have been passed, which is nothing but violative of the principles of natural justice. Hence, the impugned orders passed by the respondent dated 13.02.2017 and 02.05.2017 are set aside and the petitioner is

directed to file all the documentary evidences as well as the objections, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of the same, the assessing officer is directed to pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks thereafter.

7.The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar KM To The Commercial Tax Officer, Arakkonam Assessment Circle, Arakkonam-631 008.

+1cc to Mr.N. Senthilkumar, Advocate, S.R.No.37599 +1cc to the Spl.Government Pleader, S.R.No.37669 W.P.No.12695 of 2017 and W.M.P.No.13519 of 2017 SAI(CO) CS/22/05/17