M/S.M.G.S.Agro Bio Fuels, v. The Assistant Commissioner Ct,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 06.07.2017

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM W.P.No.17093 of 2017 and W.M.P.Nos.18575 & 18576 of 2017 M/s.M.G.S.Agro Bio Fuels, Rep. by its Proprietrix - S.Latha, No.9/5, Thandarampattu Road, Manjampoondi Village, Kilsirupakkam Post, Tiruvannamalai Taluk & District - 606 601.

... Petitioner Vs.

The Assistant Commissioner (CT), Tiruvannamalai-II Circle, Tiruvannamalai, Tiruvannamalai District.

... Respondent Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India 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.33524661771/2014-2015 dated 07.06.2017 quash the same as illegal and contrary to the scheme of the Act. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Rajasekar For Respondent : Mr.K.Venkatesh, Government Advocate

O R D E R

Heard Mr.S.Rajasekar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.K.Venkatesh, learned Government Advocate accepting notice on behalf of the respondent. With the consent on either side the writ petition itself is taken up for disposal. 2.The petitioner is a registered dealer on the file of the respondent under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act 2006 (TNVAT Act), is aggrieved by an order passed by the respondent dated 07.06.2017, which is an order confirming the proposal made in his notice dated 19.05.2017. The petitioner filed the returns for the year 2014-2015 and assessment was deemed to have been completed under Section 22(2) of the TNVAT

Act. The petitioner had filed auditor certificate in Form WW. The respondent in the notice dated 19.05.2017 pointed out that there is a defect in the Form WW apart from other issues. According to the petitioner, the notice dated 19.05.2017 was served on them only on 25.05.2017 and on 09.06.2017 they submitted a written request for granting 20 days time to submit their objection and also stated that the commodity dealt with by them is an exempted product. However, the petitioner has been served with an order of assessment dated 07.06.2017, which according to the petitioner was antedated and served on the petitioner subsequently.

3.I do not propose to go into the controversy as to whether the impugned order was antedated or not for the reason that the impugned order has been passed without reasonable opportunity to the petitioner. If the notice dated 19.05.2017 was served only on 25.05.2017, the petitioner would be entitled to submit their objections within fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of the notice and if the same is reckoned, then the impugned order has been passed well before the said time. In any event, since the petitioner claims the products to be an exempted product, there is an allegation that there is a defect in the auditor certificate, this Court is of the view that one more opportunity should be granted to the petitioner. 4.Accordingly, instead of setting aside the impugned order dated 07.06.

2017, there will be a direction to the petitioner to treat the same as a show cause notice and submit their objection within a period of ten days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of the objection, the respondent shall afford an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner and re-do the assessment in accordance with law. Till orders are passed in terms of the above direction, no coercive action shall be initiated against the petitioner. 5.With the above direction, this writ petition stands disposed of.

No costs.

Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

s/d- Assistant Registrar(CS-VIII) True Copy Sub-Assistant Registrar abr

To The Assistant Commissioner (CT), Tiruvannamalai-II Circle, Tiruvannamalai, Tiruvannamalai District.

+1 CC to Ms. R. Hemalatha, Advocate sr 47083 +1 CC to Spl. Govt. Pleader sr 47106 W.P.No.17093 of 2017 and W.M.P.Nos.18575 & 18576 of 2017 sp(19/07/2017)