Tvl.Veerakumar Traders v. The Commercial Tax Officer
In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Dated : 07.11.2016 Coram :
The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM Writ Petition No.38663 of 2016 & WMP.No.33117 of 2016 Tvl.Veerakumar Traders, rep.
by its Proprietor S.R.Eswaran
...Petitioner
Vs The Commercial Tax Officer, Kangeyam Assessment Circle, Kangeyam.
...Respondent
PETITION under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records on the file of the respondent in Cancellation ID: 268761736 dated 23.2.2015, quash the same and direct the respondent to restore TIN No.33773083686. For Petitioner :
Ms.D.Preethi For Respondent :
Mr.K.Venkatesh, GA
ORDER
Mr.K.Venkatesh, learned Government Advocate accepts notice for the respondent. Heard both. By consent, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal.
2. The petitioner, which has got a registration as a dealer on the file of the respondent under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, has approached this Court challenging an order dated 23.2.2015, in and by which, the petitioner's registration under the State Act has been cancelled without notice to the petitioner.
3. Earlier, the petitioner approached this Court by filing writ petitions in W.P.Nos.9161 to 9166 of 2016 challenging the assessment orders under the provisions of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 for the years 2009-10 to 2014-15. The said writ petitions were allowed by a common order dated 14.3.2016 by directing the petitioner to file their objections and to produce C-Forms before the respondent. Even at that stage, the Department did not inform the petitioner that the registration certificate had been cancelled and necessary information had been uploaded in the website.
https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
4. Prior to cancellation of the registration certificate, it is mandatory on the part of the respondent to issue a notice to the dealer. This is sufficient to hold that the impugned proceedings are in violation of the principles of natural justice. Further, on account of the impugned order, the order passed by this Court dated 14.3.2016 cannot be given effect to. The cancellation of the registration cannot have an effect of negativing the direction issued by this Court. All these reasons are sufficient to hold that the impugned order is not sustainable in law.
5. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed, the impugned order is set aside and the respondent is directed to restore the petitioner's registration within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If, according to the respondent, the petitioner has committed any illegality or irregularity, then the respondent shall issue a notice to the petitioner clearly stating as to why he proposes to cancel the registration and after affording an opportunity to the petitioner to submit their objections, pass necessary orders. No costs. Consequently, the above WMP is closed. Sd/- Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar rs To The Commercial Tax Officer, Kangeyam Assessment Circle, Kangeyam.
+1 cc to M/s.C.Yokesh Advocate sr 63369 +1 cc to Special Government Pleader (Taxes) sr 63522 WP.No.38663 of 2016& WMP.No.33117 of 2016 rp(co) aa29/11/2016 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/