Madras High Court
Tvl.G.Sankar Timber Depot vs The State Tax Officer ... on 26 May, 2022
W.A.(MD) No.481 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 26.05.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR
and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR
W.A.(MD)No.481 of 2022
and
C.M.P.(MD)No.4492 of 2022
Tvl.G.Sankar Timber Depot,
Represented by its Partner
S.Prabhakaran,
No.479, Tenkasi Road,
Piranoor,
Shencottai District. ...Petitioner
/Vs./
The State Tax Officer (Adjudication),
(Intelligence Wing),
Tirunelveli District. ...Respondent
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Clause 15 of the Letter Patent praying
this Court to set aside the order dated 25.04.2022 in WP(MD) No.7880 of
2022 and allow this writ appeal.
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD) No.481 of 2022
For Appellant : Mr.Anandha Rajagopal
For Respondent : Mr.S.R.A.Ramachandran
Additional Government Pleader
JUDGMENT
[Judgment of the Court was made by R.SURESH KUMAR, J.]
This writ appeal has been directed against the order passed by the
Writ Court/learned Single Judge, dated 25.04.2022, made in W.P(MD)No.
7880 of 2022.
2.In the said writ petition, the proceedings issued by the revenue in
Form GST DRC-16, dated 20.11.2021 to attach the property of the writ
petitioner was under challenge.
3.Considering the said challenge and the grounds raised by the writ
petitioner in support of the challenge, the learned Judge of this Court by
the impugned order having taken note of the earlier proceedings, under
which, this Court has given conditional directions to reassess the
assessment for three years by making some deposit of amount, had come to
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD) No.481 of 2022
a conclusion that, the said challenge cannot be made successfully and
accordingly, the writ petition was disposed of, as against which, the present
writ appeal has been filed.
4.Mr.Anandha Rajagopal, learned counsel for the appellant has
raised a point that in the earlier round of litigation, three assessment orders
were under challenge in W.P(MD).Nos.17880, 17885 and 17886 of 2020.
Those writ petitions were decided by a common order dated 08.12.2022 by
the Writ Court, under which, in each case conditional order was passed, by
which, the petitioner was directed to deposit a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- and on
such deposit, the matter can be remitted back for reconsideration by the
Assessing Authority.
5.Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant in fact filed intra Court
Appeal in W.A(MD).Nos. 691 to 693 of 2020, which were also decided by
a Division Bench of this Court, by order, dated 25.03.2021, where, while
confirming the order of the learned Single Judge, the Division Bench had
however given four weeks time to comply with the order by the appellant
therein, who is the appellant herein, i.e., making the deposit of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD) No.481 of 2022
Rs.3,00,000/- for each assessment year.
6.Pursuant to the said order, immediately, the deposit could not be
made, but belatedly that deposit had been made. Therefore, in order to
ratify the same, the petitioner had moved an extension application in
CMP(MD)Nos.7812, 7813 and 7814 of 202 in the said writ appeal, which
were also considered and decided by another Division Bench of this Court
by order, dated 24.11.2021, where the amount deposited by the appellant
having been taken note of by the Division Bench, the said miscellaneous
petitions were disposed of, by thus, the conditional order passed by the
learned Single Judge at the first instance though belatedly has been
complied with by depositing the said amount in respect of each of the
assessment year.
7.Therefore, the natural corollary would be that, the Assessing
Authority has to reassess and complete the assessment for the said three
assessment years and to pass the final orders. In this regard, according to
the learned counsel for the appellant, personal hearing sought for, that was
also given. However, before passing an order under the reassessment
process, now the impugned proceedings under Form GST DRC-16 had
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD) No.481 of 2022
been issued on 20.11.2021. Therefore, challenging the same, the present
writ petition was filed on the ground that before completing the
reassessment process as directed by the Writ Court in the first round of
litigation as confirmed by the Division Bench, now invoking the
provisions of Section 79 of the GST Act, the attachment GST DRC-16 has
been issued, that is a wrong order, though attachment proceedings can be
initiated by the revenue, only after completing the reassessment process, as
directed by this Court.
8.We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and
the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for Revenue and we
have considered the said submissions made by both sides.
9.Insofar as the order impugned before the Writ Court, dated
20.11.2021 i.e., Form GST DRC-16 is concerned, though it has been
mentioned as if it was issued under Section 79 of the Goods and Service
Tax Act, we find that such attachment order can be construed only as a
provisional attachment order made under Section 83 of the said Act.
Section 83 enable the revenue to issue provisional attachment order to
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD) No.481 of 2022
protect revenue in certain cases and if such orders are issued that will be
valid for one year, within which, if the assessment process is completed
based on which further proceedings can be initiated by the revenue.
10.Therefore, merely because of the wrong quoting of the provision,
the order impugned before the Writ Court cannot be successfully assailed
by the appellant, as the law is well settled in this regard. Non-quoting of
the provision of law or wrong quoting of the same may not vitiate the
proceedings on that ground itself.
11.In that view of the matter, this Court is inclined to pass the
following orders that:
There is absolutely no scope for interfering with the
order of the learned Judge, which is impugned in this Writ
Appeal. Therefore, the Writ Appeal is liable to be rejected.
However, this rejection will not preclude the appellant to seek
for reassessment, which has already been initiated to be
completed in the manner known to law and once the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD) No.481 of 2022
reassessment process is completed and orders are passed,
depending upon the outcome of the same, the further action
pursuant to the impugned order i.e., provisional attachment
order can very well be decided.
12.With these observations, the Writ Appeal is dismissed. There
shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected CMP(MD) No.4492
of 2022 is closed.
[R.S.K,J.] [R.V,J.]
26.05.2022
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
RMK/CP
To
The State Tax Officer (Adjudication),
(Intelligence Wing),
Tirunelveli District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD) No.481 of 2022
R.SURESH KUMAR,J.
and
R.VIJAYAKUMAR, J.
RMK/CP
Order made in
W.A.(MD)No.481 of 2022
and
C.M.P.(MD)No.4492 of 2022
Dated:
26.05.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
