Monday, 04, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Tvl.Rajgaru Plywoods vs The Assistant Commissioner [St
2021 Latest Caselaw 17741 Mad

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 17741 Mad
Judgement Date : 31 August, 2021

Madras High Court
Tvl.Rajgaru Plywoods vs The Assistant Commissioner [St on 31 August, 2021
                                                                W.A.Nos.2141, 2142, 2144, 2153 & 2158 of 2021


                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                  DATED: 31.08.2021

                                                        CORAM :

                                   The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM
                                                        and
                           The Honourable Mr.Justice SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP

                                     W.A.Nos.2141, 2142, 2144, 2153 & 2158 of 2021
                                         and C,M.P.Nos.13541, 13546, 13548,
                                                13578 & 13588 of 2021

                     Tvl.Rajgaru Plywoods,
                     Represented by its Proprietor,
                     S.Khimchand,
                     No.18, A.V.Iyer Street,
                     Shevapet, Salem – 2.                              ...Appellant in all appeals

                                                           Vs

                     The Assistant Commissioner [ST].
                     Shevapet Circle,
                     Salem.                                             ...Respondent in all appeals

                             Appeals filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent            to set aside the
                     common order dated 24.02.2021 passed in W.P.Nos.10077, 10079, 10072,
                     10083 and 10089 of 2021.
                                     For Appellant
                                     in all appeals :   Mr.R.Senniappan
                                     For Respondent
                                     in all appeals :   Mr.M.Venkateshwaran
                                                        Government Advocate

                     1/6



https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
                                                               W.A.Nos.2141, 2142, 2144, 2153 & 2158 of 2021




                                               COMMON JUDGMENT
                                             (Delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam,J)


                               These writ appeals have been filed by the appellant, who is a

                     registered dealer on the file of the respondent under the Tamil Nadu Value

                     Added Tax Act ['the Act' for brevity], challenging the order dismissing the

                     writ petitions by common order dated 24.02.2021, in which the petitioner

                     challenged the correctness of the assessment orders for the assessment years

                     2010-2011 to 2014-2015.



                               2.Since orders were passed on different dates, namely, 15.06.2020,

                     16.06.2020, 17.06.2020 and 25.06.2020, separate writ petitions were filed.



                               3.The challenge to the assessment orders was on the ground that on

                     account of the fact that the selling dealer has not paid taxes cannot be a

                     ground to made addition in the assessee's books and demand tax from the

                     assessee. The appellant placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble

                     Division Bench in the case of Altaf Shoes (P) Ltd., vs. Assistant

                     Commissioner (CT), Valluvarkottam Assessment Circle, Chennai [(2012)

                     2/6



https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
                                                                W.A.Nos.2141, 2142, 2144, 2153 & 2158 of 2021


                     50 VST 179 (MAD)]. Reliance was also placed on the decision in the case

                     of      Sri    Vinayaga   Agencies   vs.   Assistant      Commissioner          (CT),

                     Vadapalani-I Assessment Circle, Chennai and another [(2013) 60 VST

                     283(MAD)].         The appellant contended that pursuant to the inspection,

                     notice was issued to the appellant stating that taxes have not been paid in

                     respect of certain transactions effected by them. According to the appellant,

                     these details were based upon the turnover which is reported by the selling

                     dealer and the Assessing Officer alleged that there is a mismatch. This

                     ultimately led to the assessment orders being passed on 08.09.2017. The

                     appellant challenged those orders by filing W.P.Nos.30305 to 30309 of

                     2017.         Those writ petitions were allowed by common order dated

                     24.11.2017 by directing the appellant to furnish the necessary records so as

                     to enable them to file their objections.



                               4.The appellant's case is that the objections which were filed on

                     20.07.2015 itself would hold good and would cover all the submissions and

                     requested the Assessing Officer to consider the documents produced by

                     them and then take a decision. The Assessing Officer records that in spite


                     3/6



https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
                                                              W.A.Nos.2141, 2142, 2144, 2153 & 2158 of 2021


                     of opportunity of personal hearing being granted, the dealer has not filed

                     any objections pursuant to the notice dated 17.12.2020. However, we find

                     in the assessment orders in the preamble portion in reference No.2 dealer's

                     objections dated 20.07.2015 and 07.12.2016 have been set out. If according

                     to the appellant if the objections dated 20.07.2015 would hold good, then

                     nothing prevents the Assessing Officer from considering the objection and

                     taking a decision in the matter. In any event, if there is an issue regarding

                     the mismatch, the respondent should endeavour to adopt the machinery

                     evolved by the Sales Tax Department by conducting a verification process

                     by applying the circular issued by the Commissioner in this regard and if

                     certain transactions can be reconciled, they can be done so and thereafter the

                     assessee can be assessed for any escapement of turnover. Hence, we are of

                     th view that a more pragmatic approach is required to be adopted in the

                     matter both by the dealer as well as the Department. Considering the fact

                     that the assessment have been lingering and yet to attain finality from the

                     year 2015 onwards, we are inclined to grant one final opportunity to the

                     appellant to establish that they cannot be found fault for the alleged fault

                     committed by the selling dealer.


                     4/6



https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
                                                                 W.A.Nos.2141, 2142, 2144, 2153 & 2158 of 2021


                               5.For all the above reasons, the writ appeals are allowed, order passed

                     in the writ petitions are set aside and there will be a direction to the

                     appellant to appear before the respondent on 14.09.2021 along with the

                     books of accounts this will be the final opportunity to the appellant to

                     establish his case. It is not sufficient for the appellant to merely refer to the

                     decisions alone but he should produce the books of accounts to prove the

                     genuineness of the stand taken by them in the objections dated 20.07.2015.

                     We give liberty to the appellant to give one more additional objection which

                     shall also be considered by the respondent. However, if the appellant fails

                     to avail such an opportunity, the benefit of this order will not enure to the

                     appellant and the writ appeals would stand automatically dismissed without

                     further reference to this Court and the liberty granted by the learned Writ

                     Court would stand restored.            No costs.        Consequently, connected

                     miscellaneous petitions are closed.


                                                                              (T.S.S.,J.)    (S.S.K,J.)
                                                                                     31.08.2021
                     Index: Yes/No
                     Internet:Yes/No
                     Speaking Judgment/Non speaking Judgment
                     cse
                     Note: Issue order copy on 06.09.2021

                     5/6



https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
                                                         W.A.Nos.2141, 2142, 2144, 2153 & 2158 of 2021




                                                                T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J.

AND SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP,J.

cse

To

The Assistant Commissioner [ST]. Shevapet Circle, Salem.

W.A.Nos.2141, 2142, 2144, 2153 & 2158 of 2021

31.08.2021

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter