Madras High Court
The Designated Committee vs M/S.Akshaya Aqua Farms on 6 September, 2024
Author: R.Suresh Kumar
Bench: R.Suresh Kumar, C.Saravanan
W.A.No.2788 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 06.09.2024
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN
W.A.No.2788 of 2021
and C.M.P.No.18290 of 2021
1. The Designated Committee,
Chennai-Outer Commissionerate,
Newry Tower, Plot No.2054, 1st Block,
12th Main Road, 2nd Avenue,
Anna Nagar, Chennai 600 040.
2. The Senior Intelligence Officer,
Directorate General of Goods & Service
Tax Intelligence, Chennai Zonal Unit,
C-3, C-Wing, II Floor, Rajaji Bhavan,
Besant Nagar, Chennai 600 090. .. Appellants
-vs-
M/s.Akshaya Aqua Farms
Rep. by its Managing Partner, G.Vinayagamurthy
#347/1A, Vayalur Road, Ulundal Village,
Thiruvallur District 602 105, Tamil Nadu. .. Respondent
__________
Page 1 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.2788 of 2021
Prayer: Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters patent against the order
dated 02.07.2021 passed in W.P.No.3191 of 2021 on the file of this Court.
For the Appellant : Mr.M.Santhanaraman
For the Respondent : Ms.R.Srivisvapriya
for Mr.J.Shankarraman
*****
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was made by R.Suresh Kumar, J.)
This writ appeal has been preferred against the order passed by the
Writ Court dated 02.07.2021 made in W.P.No.3191 of 2021.
2. The respondent was the writ petitioner who wanted to avail the
benefit of Sabka Viswas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 and he
applied for the same, however, it was rejected by the appellant Revenue by
order dated 07.02.2022 in one line order which shows as follows:
"Dear taxpayer, your SVLDRS Form for the ARN
No.LD1112190001929 has been rejected."
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
This was under challenge before the Writ Court at the instance of the
respondent assessee.
3. Before the Writ Court, even though subsequently in the counter-
affidavit filed by the Revenue some defence was taken, that was not
accepted and the order impugned before the Writ Court since does not
disclose any such reasons, the learned Judge was of the view that the said
order could be set aside and the matter could be remanded back to the
appellant Revenue for re-consideration. While re-considering the same
under the provisions of the Act, the learned Judge directed Section 137 also
to be taken into account, against which only the present appeal has been
filed.
4. Reiterating the grounds that have been urged before this Court in
this appeal, Mr.M.Santhanaraman, learned standing counsel appearing for
the appellant/Revenue would contend that what is the eligibility for availing
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
such a benefit under the SVLDRS itself since shows that the respondent is
not eligible to claim and therefore, to that extent, the application made by the
respondent/assessee could not have been considered by the appellant and
this aspect even though has been projected before the learned Judge,
nevertheless, the learned Judge has remitted the matter back for
consideration. Therefore, that order is under challenge, he contended.
5. We have also heard Ms.Srivisvapriya, learned counsel appearing
for the respondent/assessee.
6. We have gone through the impugned order passed by the Writ
Court where the learned Judge has taken note of the one line order passed by
the appellant Revenue and the same cannot be improved by filing any
counter by way of defence and this legal position is a well settled
proposition. Therefore, we do not find any reason to interfere with the
approach and the conclusion reached by the learned Judge in remitting the
matter back to the Revenue to re-consider the same on merits and in
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
accordance with law.
7. Therefore, this appeal fails and the same is dismissed confirming
the order passed by the Writ Court. There is no order as to costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is also dismissed.
8. It is made clear that if at all any ineligibility is attached with the
respondent/assessee in considering the application to avail the scheme in
terms of Section 125 of the Finance Act, 2019, those reasons also can be
stated before taking any decision and a reasoned order be passed by the
appellant/Revenue.
(R.S.K., J.) (C.S.N., J.)
06.09.2024
Index : Yes/No
NC : Yes/No
sra
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
R.SURESH KUMAR, J.
AND
C.SARAVANAN,J.
(sra)
06.09.2024
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
