Hinduja Foundries Limited, v. Assistant Commissioner (C.T)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 08.06.2017
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAVICHANDRABAABU W.P.No.9744 of 2016 and W.M.P.No.8727 of 2016 M/s.Hinduja Foundries Limited, Rep.by its authorized signatory S.Ramachandran Kathivakkam High Road, Ennore, Chennai-600 057.
... Petitioner .Vs.
Assistant Commissioner (CT), Manali Assessment Circle, No.5/79, 1st & 2nd Floor, V Cross Street, K.K.D.Nagar, Kodungaiyur, Chennai-600 118.
... Respondent PRAYER: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issue a Writ of Prohibition prohibiting the Respondent, not to proceed further in respect of proposals initiated in the impugned notice issued in TIN/33241080006/2014-15 dated 02.02.2016 in so far it proposes to reverse the Input Tax Credit of Rs.3,33,75,199/- relating to proviso of Section 19(2) of the TNVAT Act 2006. For Petitioner : Mr.N.Murali For Respondent : Mr.K.Venkatesh, Government Advocate
O R D E R
This Writ Petition is filed challenging the notice of proposal only insofar as the reversal of ITC under Section 19(2) (v) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax, Act, 2006, is concerned. In other words, the petitioner is not questioning the impugned notice in respect of other issues, as the petitioner is willing to agitate the same before the Assessing Authority insofar as those issues are concerned.
2. Heard Mr.N.Murali, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.K.Venkatesh, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent. By consent of the parties, the main writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.
3. The challenge made in this writ petition is against the notice of proposal, only insofar as the issue of ITC reversal under Section 19(2)(v) of the said Act is concerned. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that since this writ petitioner is a manufacturer, they are entitled to take the credit under Section 19(2)(v) of the said Act and therefore, there is no necessity for issuing notice of proposal as against the petitioner. In respect of such issue, the learned counsel relied on the decision made by this Court in W.P.No.7969/2014 dated 06.02.2017.
4. On the other hand, the learned Government Advocate submitted since the challenge is made against the notice, the petitioner can always give their objections and such objections will be considered in the light of the order already passed by this Court in W.P.No.7969/2014 dated 06.02.2017.
5. Considering the fact that this writ petition is filed only against the notice and that the petitioner can always file their objections before the Assessing Officer, I am of the view that even in respect of the issue relating to (ITC) input tax credit reversal under Section 19(2)(v) of the said Act, the petitioner can raise their objections also by relying on the recent decision made by this Court in W.P.No.7969/2014 dated 06.02.2017. If any such objection is filed, the Assessing Authority shall consider such issue in the light of the said order passed by this Court.
Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of, by granting two weeks time to the petitioner to file their reply before the respondent from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and on receipt of such reply, the Assessing Officer shall pass appropriate orders insofar as the issue of ITC reversal u/S 19(2)(v) of the said Act, in the light of the order already passed by this Court in W.P.No.7969/2014 dated 06.02.2017, within a period of two weeks thereafter. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
Sd/- Deputy Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar
KP To The Assistant Commissioner (CT), Manali Assessment Circle, No.5/79, 1st & 2nd Floor, V Cross Street, K.K.D.Nagar, Kodungaiyur, Chennai-600 118.
+1cc to Mr.N.Murali, Advocate, S.R.No.40943 +1cc to the Special Government Pleader(T), S.R.No.40925 W.P.No.9744 of 2016 KK(CO) CA(16/06/2017)