Madras High Court
M/S. Kiran Distributors vs The Assistant Commissioner (Ct) on 29 September, 2021
W.A. Nos. 2404, 2407, 2427 and 2433 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 29.09.2021
CORAM
The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM
and
The Honourable Mr.Justice SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP
W.A. Nos. 2404, 2407, 2427 and 2433 of 2021
and
C.M.P. Nos. 15433, 15439, 15380, 15540, 15541, 15572 and 15574 of 2021
M/s. Kiran Distributors,
Represented by its Proprietor,
No.63, Perumal Koil Garden II Lane,
Sowcarpet, Chennai – 600 079. ... Appellant is
all WAs
Vs.
1. The Assistant Commissioner (CT),
Peddunnaickenpet Assessment Circle,
Rajaji Salai, Chennai – 600 001.
2. The Deputy Commissioner (CT),
Enforcement (North),
PAPJM Building,
Chennai – 600 006. ... Respondents in all WAs
Appeals filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, praying to allow the
above Writ Appeals by setting aside the common order dated 15.06.2021
passed in W.P.Nos. 18024, 18022, 18025 and 18023 of 2016 on the file of this
Court and allow the Writ Petitions.
http://www.judis.nic.in
1/9
W.A. Nos. 2404, 2407, 2427 and 2433 of 2021
For Appellant : Mr. P.Rajkumar
(in all WAs)
For Respondents : Mr. M.Venkateswaran
(in all WAs) Government Counsel
******
COMMON JUDGME NT
(Delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam, J.)
These appeals have been filed by the writ petitioner challenging the
common order passed in W.P. Nos. 18024, 18022, 18025 and 18023 of 2016
dated 15.06.2021.
2. Heard Mr. P.Rajkumar, Learned counsel for the appellant and
Mr. M.Venkateswaran, Learned Government Counsel appearing for the
respondents, and perused the materials placed on record.
3.One of the dealers, who was aggrieved by the said common order had
filed writ appeals in W.A. Nos. 2222, 2226, 2229 and 2242 of 2021 and by a
common judgment dated 08.09.2021, those appeals were allowed and the
matters were remanded to the Assessing Authority for fresh consideration. The
operative portion of that common order is extracted as follows:-
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.A. Nos. 2404, 2407, 2427 and 2433 of 2021
“14. The Writ Petitions were entertained in the year 2014
and an order of interim stay was granted, and the order of
interim stay continued to be in force till the disposal of the
Writ Petitions vide order dated 15.06.2020.
15. In the light of the recent decision of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court as cited supra, one of the exceptions, which
has been drawn, for permitting an aggrieved person to
approach this Court and invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction
of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
despite availability of an alternate remedy, is when there is
violation of principles of natural justice. We need not labour
much to investigate and ascertain as to whether the
Respondent had received the reply dated 06.12.2013, since
the Assessing Officer in the Counter-affidavit filed in the Writ
Petitions has accepted that the reply dated 06.12.2013 was
received. If such is the case, it goes without saying that the
Assessment orders dated 26.02.2014, 26.02.2014, 27.02.2014
and 27.02.2014 passed are in violation of the principles of
natural justice. That apart, in the objections given by the
Appellant dated 18.11.2013, apart from pointing that the
selling-dealer’s registration was very much valid, and that
they have been filing e-returns, the Appellant sought for 23
details/documents, which have been listed above, and the
Assessing Officer does not dispute the fact that he has
received the reply / objections dated 18.11.2013. But without
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.A. Nos. 2404, 2407, 2427 and 2433 of 2021
taking note of the request made by the Appellant, the second
notice dated 03.12.2013 has been issued once again alleging
that the Appellant has purchased from the Registration
certificate cancelled dealers and in addition, that the
Appellant has not filed any proof for physical movement of
goods the assessments were completed.
16. Had the Respondent furnished the details / documents
sought for by the Appellant in their reply /objections dated
18.11.2013 or given a reply to the said communication, with
regard to the Appellant entitlement to seek any of or all of 23
details and documents, it would have been a different matter?
17. However, the Respondent has virtually ignored the
reply dated 18.11.2013, wherein the Appellant, apart from
giving its preliminary objections for the revision of
assessment, has also sought for certain details and
documents. That apart, there has been a specific request
made by the Appellant in the representation 18.11.2013 to
grant an opportunity of personal hearing. This has also been
brushed aside, while issuing the second notice dated
03.12.2013. That apart, in the Assessment orders the
Assessing Officer has stated that the Appellant has not
furnished any reply to the second notice, whereas it has been
admitted in the Counter-affidavit that the reply / objections
dated 06.12.2013 has been received.
18. Therefore, we are of the clear view that there have been
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.A. Nos. 2404, 2407, 2427 and 2433 of 2021
gross violation of principles of natural justice, which would
justify our stand that the Appellant is entitled to invoke the
extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court and consequently,
Writ Petitions are held to be maintainable.
19. For all the above reasons, we are inclined to interfere
the common order passed by the Learned Writ Court and
issue certain directions, so that the assessments can be
completed, after complying with the principles of natural
justice.
20. Accordingly, the Writ Appeals are allowed and the
orders passed in the Writ Petitions are set aside and the
assessment orders impugned in the writ petitions are quashed
and these matters are remitted to the Assessing Officer and
the Assessing Officer is directed to issue notice to the
Appellant to appear in-person and during their personal
appearance, the Appellant is directed to submit a further
reply, clearly specifying as to what are all documents and
details they would require and on such written request, the
Assessing Officer shall consider and provide copies of the
available details/ documents, or if the details and documents
are very voluminous, the representative of the Appellant
would be entitled to peruse the details and documents in the
office of the Respondent and after furnishing/ perusal, within
15 days therefrom, a fresh objection shall be given by the
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.A. Nos. 2404, 2407, 2427 and 2433 of 2021
Appellant to the proposals made in both the notices dated
06.11.2013 and 03.12.2013 and on receipt of the objections,
the respondent shall afford opportunity of personal hearing
to the authorised representative of the Appellant and re-do
the assessment in accordance with law.
21. On the above terms, these Writ Appeals are allowed. No
costs.”
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that there is a slight
factual distinction between the cases of the dealers, which was the subject
matter of the above referred judgment in the writ appeals.
5. In our view, the writ petitions were dismissed solely on the ground of
availability of alternative remedy and the factual position has not gone into. We
have examined the matters and we found that the writ petitions were
maintainable and we have directed the Assessing Authorities to re-do the
assessment. Therefore, we make it clear that it is open to the appellant-dealers
to raise all contentions before the Assessing Officer.
6. In the light of the above, the writ appeals are allowed and the orders
passed in the Writ Petitions are set aside and the assessment orders impugned
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.A. Nos. 2404, 2407, 2427 and 2433 of 2021
in the writ petitions are quashed and these matters are remitted to the Assessing
Officer and the Assessing Officer is directed to issue notice to the Appellant to
appear in-person and during their personal appearance, the Appellant is directed
to submit a further reply, clearly specifying as to what are all documents and
details they would require and on such written request, the Assessing Officer
shall consider and provide copies of the available details/ documents, or if the
details and documents are very voluminous, the representative of the Appellant
would be entitled to peruse the details and documents in the office of the
Respondent and after furnishing/ perusal, within 15 days therefrom, a fresh
objection shall be given by the Appellant and on receipt of the objections, the
respondent shall afford opportunity of personal hearing to the authorised
representative of the Appellant and re-do the assessment in accordance with
law. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
[T.S.S., J.] [S.S.K., J.]
29.09.2021
Sp/Maya
Index: Yes/ No
Speaking Order : Yes/ No
To
1. The Assistant Commissioner (CT),
Peddunnaickenpet Assessment Circle,
Rajaji Salai, Chennai – 600 001.
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.A. Nos. 2404, 2407, 2427 and 2433 of 2021
2. The Deputy Commissioner (CT),
Enforcement (North),
PAPJM Building,
Chennai – 600 006.
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.A. Nos. 2404, 2407, 2427 and 2433 of 2021
T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J.
and
SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP, J.
Sp
W.A. Nos. 2404, 2407, 2427 and 2433 of 2021
Dated : 29.09.2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
