Madras High Court
M/S. Paras Granites vs The Assistant Commissioner (Ct) on 11 January, 2022
W.A. Nos. 3110, 3136, 3138 & 3139 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 11.01.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN
and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ
W.A. Nos. 3110, 3136, 3138 and 3139 of 2021
and
C.M.P. Nos. 21586, 21704, 21715 and 21716 of 2021
M/s. Paras Granites
Represented by its Proprietor
M.Parasmal Choudhary
No.19-A, SIPCOT
Hosur-635 126
Krishnagiri District. .. Appellant in all W.As
Versus
The Assistant Commissioner (CT)
Hosur North
Hosur, Krishnagiri District. .. Respondent in all W.As
Appeals filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent to set aside the
common order dated 24.11.2020 passed in W.P. Nos. 5924 to 5927 of 2015.
For Appellant : Mr. Manoharan Sundaram
in all the appeals
For Respondent : Mr. Arun Natarajan
Special Government Pleader (Taxes)
in all the appeals
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A. Nos. 3110, 3136, 3138 & 3139 of 2021
COMMON JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by R.Mahadevan, J.)
These intra-court appeals have been filed by the assessee challenging the
common order dated 24.11.2020 passed by the learned single Judge in W.P.
Nos. 5924 to 5927 of 2015.
2.The appellant is doing the business of granite polished slab and
assessee on the file of the respondent. They are the registered dealer under the
Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 (in short, 'The TNVAT Act, 2006'). For
the assessment years 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 and 2013-14, the appellant
filed their returns, claiming input tax credit. Upon scrutiny of the same,
pointing out certain defects and sales suppression, the respondent issued
notices proposing to levy tax and penalty under the TNVAT Act, 2006 and
calling upon the appellant to respond to the same. Thereafter, they passed the
assessment orders dated 30.09.2014, confirming the proposals made in the
said notices. Challenging the same, the appellant preferred the writ petitions
viz., WP.Nos.5924 to 5927 of 2015. By order dated 24.11.2020, the learned
single judge dismissed the said writ petitions, on the ground that the appellant
did not avail appeal remedy under section 51 of the TNVAT Act, within the
maximum limitation period. Aggrieved over the same, the appellant is before
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A. Nos. 3110, 3136, 3138 & 3139 of 2021
this court with the present writ appeals.
3.According to the learned counsel for the appellant, in the writ
petitions, the appellant challenged the assessment orders for want of
jurisdiction and reasons of unauthorised levy of tax and penalty, apart from
making equal addition of turnover, that too, without affording opportunity of
personal hearing, which violates the principles of natural justice. The said writ
petitions were admitted and an order of interim stay was granted on
05.03.2015. However, the learned single judge, without going into the merits of
the case, dismissed the writ petitions on the ground that the assessment orders
were challenged after the expiry of period of limitation of 60 days, by order
impugned herein, which is arbitrary, illegal and contrary to law.
4.On the other hand, the learned Special Government Pleader (Taxes)
appearing for the respondent made his submission supporting the order passed
by the learned single Judge.
5.Heard both sides and perused the documents placed before this court.
6.Strictly speaking, there cannot be any time limit for invoking writ
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A. Nos. 3110, 3136, 3138 & 3139 of 2021
jurisdiction. However, it is settled law that by way of self imposed restrictions,
the High court will not entertain any writ petition, when an efficacious alternate
remedy before the appellate authority is available to the aggrieved party.
Therefore, we are not inclined to delve into the legality of the issue raised
herein, but inclined to permit the appellant to approach the appellate authority
under section 51 of the TNVAT Act against the assessment orders passed by
the respondent. The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the
respondent has not raised any objection for granting such relief to the
appellant. On that score alone, the order impugned in these writ appeals is
liable to be set aside.
7. Accordingly, the order dated 24.11.2020 passed by the learned single
judge in WP Nos.5924 to 5927 of 2015, is set aside. The appellant is permitted
to approach the appellate authority by filing appeals within a period of two
weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. On such filing, the
appellate authority shall entertain the same, without raising any issue as
regards the limitation, and pass appropriate orders, on merits, after affording
reasonable opportunity of hearing to the appellant, within a period of six
months thereafter.
8.All the writ appeals stand disposed of, in the above terms. No costs.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A. Nos. 3110, 3136, 3138 & 3139 of 2021
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
[R.M.D., J.] [M.S.Q., J.]
11.01.2022
Index : Yes/No
Speaking/Non-Speaking Order
Maya
To
The Assistant Commissioner (CT)
Hosur North
Hosur, Krishnagiri District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A. Nos. 3110, 3136, 3138 & 3139 of 2021
R. MAHADEVAN, J
and
MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J
Maya
WA Nos. 3110, 3136, 3138 and 3139 of 2021
Dated : 11.01.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
