Rajendran v. The Deputy Commissioner Of Appeals (St)

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 04.09.2023

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY and W.M.P.(MD)No.14696 of 2023 Rajendran ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Deputy Commissioner of Appeals (ST), Trichy.

2.The Assistant Commissioner (CT), Woraiyur Assessment Circle, Trichy.

... Respondents PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to proceedings issued by the 1st respondent in MP No.23 of 2022, dated 05.09.2022 and to quash the same as arbitrary and illegal and to direct the 1st respondent to entertain the appeal and decide the same on merits. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Karunakar For Respondents : Mr.A.K.Manikkam Special Government Pleader 1/5

O R D E R

This writ petition is filed for writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to quash the impugned order dated 05.09.2022 passed in MP No.23 of 2022 by the 1st respondent as arbitrary and illegal and to direct the 1st respondent to entertain the appeal and decide the same on merits.

2. The petitioner is executing works contract for various government departments. For the year 2014-2015 the petitioner was originally assessed on the total and taxable turnover of Rs.1,52,48,160/- and Rs. 34,16,166/- by accepting the returns filed by the petitioner on 31.10.2015 on self-assessment basis under section 22 (2) of TNVAT Act and the respondent had passed assessment order dated 15.02.2017 by confirming the proposal. The respondent had held that the petitioner had not filed any records, but the petitioner had filed records, hence aggrieved over the petitioner had preferred W.P.(MD)No.5284 of 2017. This Court vide order dated 30.01.2019 had disposed of the writ petition and directed the respondents to issue TDS certificate within a period of two weeks in order to enable the petitioner to pay the 25% of the pre-deposit amount for filing the appeal. 2/5

3. The petitioner had waited for TDS certificate, but could not follow up due to illness and covid-19. Hence in order to buy peace the petitioner had filed application under section 84, which was considered by the 2nd respondent and revised assessment order dated 27.05.2022 was passed, wherein TDS amount alone was taken for consideration. Hence the petitioner filed appeal challenging the revised assessment order, which was returned by the 1st respondent by observing that the petitioner had not preferred any appeal as directed by the Court.

4. It is seen that this Court had passed an order directing the respondents to issue TDS certificate and on receipt of the same the petitioner was directed to file an appeal. But the respondents without complying the direction issued to them, had simply rejected the by stating that the petitioner had not filed the appeal. Therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion that the impugned order passed by the respondent cannot be sustained. The contention of the petitioner is that the petitioner has already deposited 25% of the demand.

3/5

5. Therefore, the respondents are directed to issue the certificate within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of such certificate, the petitioner is at liberty to file an appeal to the appellate authority within a period of four weeks therefrom.

6. With the above said observation, the writ petition is allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 04.09.2023 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No Tmg To 1.The Deputy Commissioner of Appeals (ST), Trichy.

2.The Assistant Commissioner (CT), Woraiyur Assessment Circle, Trichy.

4/5

S.SRIMATHY, J.

Tmg 04.09.2023 5/5