← Library
Madras High CourtWP/15584/2017disposed of

M/S.Rakesh Agencies v. The Commercial Tax Officer,

2017-06-21Honourable Mr Justice K. Ravichandrabaabu3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED:- 21.06.2017

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAVICHANDRABAABU W.P.No. 15584 of 2017 and W.M.P.No.16883 of 2017 M/s.Rakesh Agencies Rep. by its Proprietor G.Murugan

...Petitioner

Versus

The Commercial Tax Officer Chidambaram-II, Cuddalore District.

...Respondent

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the impugned proceedings of the respondent pursuant to the assessment orders in TIN.No.33604462004/2015-16 dated 27.02.2017 and to quash the assessment proceedings as illegal and direct the respondent to pass fresh orders for the mismatch cases relating to website based on the guidelines and directions given by the Madras High Court in the batch of cases in WP.No.105 of 2016 and others relating to M/s.JKM Graphic Solutions Pvt. Limited & Others Vs. The Commercial Tax Officer, Vepery Assessment Circle and others dated 01.03.2017 after providing an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner. For Petitioner : Mr.B.Singaravelu For Respondent : Mr.K.Venkatesh, Government Advocate

O R D E R

Mr.K.Venkatesh, learned Government Advocate, takes notice for the respondent and by consent of the parties, the main writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal.

2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order of assessment dated 27.02.2017 passed in respect of the assessment year 20152016.

3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the only issue involved in this case is mis-match and the said issue was already considered by this Court in WP.No.105 of 2016 etc., dated 01.03.2017, wherein certain directions / guidelines are issued to the Assessing Officer to follow while dealing with the issue of mis-match. Therefore, he submitted that when the Assessing Officer in this case has not followed those procedures / guidelines, even before issuing the notice of proposal, failure to give a reply to the notice of proposal, will not absolve the liability of the Assessing Officer to pass the order of assessment in accordance with the order passed by this Court in WP.No.105 of 2016 etc., dated 01.03.2017.

5. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent submitted that since the petitioner has not utilized the opportunity by giving a reply to the show cause notice, the Assessing Officer is left with no other option, but to pass the assessment order.

6. Heard both sides.

7. It is not in dispute that the only issue involved in this matter is the mis-match and the said issue was already covered by the decision of this Court made in WP.No.105 of 2016 etc., dated 01.03.2017. It is true that the petitioner has not utilized the opportunity by giving a reply to the notice of proposal. However, as pointed out by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, even before issuing the said notice of proposal, the Assessing Officer has to do some exercise as stipulated in the above said order passed by this Court in WP.No.105 of 2016 etc., dated 01.03.2017. Therefore, there is no purpose in saying that the petitioner has not given a reply to the show cause notice. In any event, as the Assessing Officer has to re-do the assessment in the light of the order passed by this Court in WP.No.105 of 2016 etc., dated 01.03.2017, this Court is of the view that the matter should be remitted back to the Assessing Officer for re-doing the assessment after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well.

8. Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed and the impugned order of assessment is set aside. Consequently, the matter is remitted back to the Assessing Officer for re-doing the assessment, commencing from the issuance of the notice of proposal after following the procedures / guidelines issued by

this Court in WP.No.105 of 2016 etc., dated 01.03.2017. The whole exercise shall be completed by the Assessing Officer within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CCC) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar mk To The Commercial Tax Officer Chidambaram-II, Cuddalore District.

+1cc to Mr.B.Singaravelu, Advocate Sr.43369 +1cc to the Special Government Pleader sr.43708 W.P.No.15584 of 2017 GJ[CO] SRG 28/06/2017