← Library
Madras High CourtWP/9380/2015disposed of

The New Golden Steels v. The Assistant Commissioner

2015-03-31Honourable Mr Justice S. Vaidyanathan3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 31.03.2015

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN W.P.No.9380 of 2015 and M.P.No.1 of 2015 The New Golden Steels, rep. by its Proprietor, No.5/1,81, B/1, Gandhi Building, SIPCOT, Ranipet.

... Petitioner Vs The Assistant Commissioner(CT) Ranipet, Vellore District.

... Respondent Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records of the respondent in his proceedings in TIN 33554282727/2012-2013 and quash the assessment order dt 23.2.2015.

For Petitioner : Mr.V.Sudakar For Respondent : Mr.Manoharan Sundaram, AGP(T)

O R D E R

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader (Taxes), who took notice for the respondent and with their consent, the writ petition is taken up for hearing.

2. The petitioner has come forward with this writ petition challenging the order of the respondent dated 23.02.2015 and for a direction to the respondent to provide an opportunity to present its objections.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner Company submitted that the grievance of the petitioner Company is that even though in the impugned order, it has been stated that even after serving of notice, since the petitioner has not filed any objection and that the petitioner has not availed sufficient opportunity given to them and hence they are confirming the proposals and revised orders are passed, no opportunity of being heard was given to the representative of the petitioner. Hence, the impugned orders are liable to be quashed.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the petitioner would co-operate to enable the assessing officer to complete the proceedings afresh.

5. A glance over the impugned assessment orders would show that the petitioner was not given an opportunity of being heard. For the sake of convenience, Section 22 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax, 2006 is extracted below:- "(22) Procedure to be followed by Assessing Authority:- (1)...

(2)...

(3)....

(4) If no return is submitted by the dealer for that year, the assessing authority shall, after making such enquiry as it may consider necessary, assess the dealer to the best of its judgment, subject to such conditions as may be prescribed: Provided that before taking action under this sub-section, the dealer shall be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard".

In this case, admittedly, no opportunity of being heard was given to the petitioner.

6. Hence, without going into the merits of the matter, on the ground of violation of principles of natural justice, the impugned assessment order dated 23.02.2015 is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the respondent for passing fresh orders. The respondent is directed to give an opportunity of personal hearing to the representative of the petitioner as provided under Section 22(4) of the Act and decide the matter afresh on merits and in accordance with law.

This writ petition is disposed of with the above direction. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar True Copy Sub Assistant Registrar

To The Assistant Commissioner(CT) Ranipet, Vellore District.

+1 cc to Spl.Government Pleader,SR.18240 +1 cc to Mr.P.V.Sudakar, Advocate,SR.18139.

km(co) krd 16/4 W.P.No.9380 of 2015