Madras High Court
Tvl.Three Star Maligai vs The Commissioner Of Commercial ... on 8 April, 2021
W.P(MD)No.1566 of 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 08.04.2021
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE J.NISHA BANU
W.P(MD) No.1566 of 2021
and
W.M.P(MD)Nos.1331 and 1332 of 2021
Tvl.Three Star Maligai,
Represented by its Proprietor,
S.Nizamudeen ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes,
O/o.the Principal and Special Commissioner of
Commercial Taxes,
Ezhilagam, Chepauk,
Chennai – 600 005.
2.The Assistant Commissioner (ST) – III,
Dindigul – III Assessment Circle,
Commercial Taxes Office,
Sub-Collector Office Road,
Dindigul- 624 001. ... Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records pertaining to
the impugned proceedings of the second respondent in
TIN.33475241325/2014-15, dated 30.05.2019 and quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Veeramanikandan
For Respondents : Mrs.J.Padmavathi Devi,
Special Government Pleader
1/7
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P(MD)No.1566 of 2021
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner to quash the impugned
order of the second respondent dated 30.05.2019 passed in
TIN.33475241325/2014-15.
2.The brief facts of the case are as follows:
The petitioner is the Proprietor of a Concern in the name and style of
M/s.Three Star Maligai at Dindigul and the said Concern, is registered on the
file of the second respondent in TIN33475241325. During the year 2014-2015,
the second respondent passed an original-cum-self assessment order on
31.10.2015 by accepting the returns submitted by the petitioner under Section
22(2) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act. While so, the second
respondent issued summons in Form PP dated 28.09.2018, 19.11.2018 and
06.12.2018, to produce the accounts for verification. Since the petitioner's son
was in serious health condition, at that time, the petitioner was not able to
produce the accounts before the second respondent for verification. The
petitioner has also produced the death certificate of his son to explain the
reason for non-production of his accounts before the second respondent at the
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P(MD)No.1566 of 2021
relevant point of time. However, the second respondent issue a pre-revision
notice dated 29.04.2019 and thereafter, the impugned order has been passed on
31.05.2019 and subsequently, based on the impugned order, demand notice has
also been issued by the second respondent on 04.11.2019. Hence, this writ
petition.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that
since the son of the petitioner was in serious health condition, he could not
produce the accounts for verification. He would further submit that as per
Section 27 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, reasonable
opportunity should be given to the petitioner to explain his case and therefore,
the impugned order is to be set aside.
4. In support of his submission, the learned counsel for the petitioner
would rely on the common judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in
G.V.Cotton Mills (P) Ltd., vs. the Assistant Commissioner(CT),
Coimbatore (W.A.Nos.234 to 240 of 2015). The relevant portion of the said
judgment is extracted hereunder:
“DENIAL OF PERSONAL HEARING:
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P(MD)No.1566 of 2021
10. .... In case the assessee fail to appear, it is open to the
assessment authority to pass orders on merits. We make the
position clear that the failure to submit objection to the pre-
assessment notice would not give a right to the Assessment
Officer to deny opportunity of personal hearing to the assessee.”
5. Per contra, the learned Special Government Pleader would submit that
opportunities were given to the petitioner to produce his accounts for
verification. But, the petitioner did not avail that opportunities and therefore,
the second respondent passed the impugned order and hence, there is no
illegality or infirmity in the said order.
6. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned
Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents and perused the
materials placed before the Court.
7. Section 27 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, provides
for reasonable opportunity, which includes the personal hearing. However, the
petitioner has not been given personal hearing and therefore, considering the
facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the considered view that the
impugned order is liable to be set aside and the matter needs consideration
afresh.
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P(MD)No.1566 of 2021
8. In the result, this writ petition is allowed and the impugned order
passed by the second respondent dated 30.05.2019, is set aside and the matter is
remanded back to the second respondent for fresh consideration after giving
reasonable opportunity including the personal hearing as contemplated under
Section 27 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 and to pass
appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law. Such exercise shall
be completed by the second respondent, within a period of eight weeks from the
date of receipt of a copy of this order. No Costs. Consequently, connected
Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
08.04.2021
PM
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
Note:(i) In view of the present lock down
owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy
of the order may be utilized for official
purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the
order that is presented is the correct copy,
shall be the responsibility of the
advocate/litigant concerned.
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P(MD)No.1566 of 2021
To
1.The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes,
O/o.the Principal and Special Commissioner of
Commercial Taxes,
Ezhilagam, Chepauk,
Chennai – 600 005.
2.The Assistant Commissioner (ST) – III,
Dindigul – III Assessment Circle,
Commercial Taxes Office,
Sub-Collector Office Road,
Dindigul- 624 001.
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P(MD)No.1566 of 2021
J.NISHA BANU, J.,
PM
W.P(MD)No.1566 of 2021
08.04.2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
