Mobile View
Main Search Forums Advanced Search Disclaimer
Cites 4 docs
The Bihar Value Added Tax Act, 2005
Section 51 in The Bihar Value Added Tax Act, 2005
Section 22(2) in The Bihar Value Added Tax Act, 2005
Article 226 in The Constitution Of India 1949

Madras High Court
M/S.Naraiuran Controls (India) P ... vs The Commercial Tax Officer on 5 October, 2012

DATE: 05.10.2012

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN

Writ Petition No.18952 of 2012

and

M.P.No.1 of 2012

M/s.Naraiuran Controls (India) P Limited,

Rep by its Managing Director Mr.N.Ravi Shankar

No.41, Krishnapuram Road,

Choolaimedu, Chennai-600 094. .. Petitioner.

Versus

The Commercial Tax Officer,

Vadapalani II Assessment Circle,

No.621, Anna Salai, SIRE Mansion,

Chennai-600 006. .. Respondent.

Prayer: Petition filed seeking for a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the respondent in TIN 33291483256/2008-09, quash the impugned revised order dated 29/03/12 and further direct the respondent to pass orders afresh after considering the objections enclosed in the Annexures filed by the petitioner and thereafter pass orders in accordance with law. For Petitioner : Mr.V.Sundareswaran

For Respondent : Mr.S.Kanmani Annamalai

Government Advocate (Taxes)

O R D E R

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent.

2. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had submitted that the respondent, having passed the assessment order, dated 15.11.2010,accepting the returns filed by the petitioner, under Section 22(2) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, had issued a notice for revision of assessment on the same day, i.e. on 15.11.2010. The respondent does not have any authority to issue such a notice for revision of assessment, on the same day, after having passed an order, under Section 22(2) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner had also submitted that the objections filed by the petitioner, on 27.1.2011, relating to the reversal of input tax credit on sales made by the petitioner to Export Oriented Units and the sales made to Special Economic Zones and the objections raised by the petitioner, with regard to the dis-allowance of transit sales exemptions had not been considered by the respondent, while passing the impugned order, dated 29.3.2012. Further, the respondent had not given any opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner before passing the said order. Therefore, the impugned order of the respondent, dated 29.3.2012, is liable to be set aside.

4. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent had submitted that all the objections raised by the petitioner had been considered by the respondent, while passing the impugned order, dated 29.3.2012. Further, the petitioner has an alternative remedy, by way of an appeal, to challenge the impugned order of the respondent, dated 29.3.2012, under Section 51 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006. Therefore, the present Writ Petition filed by the petitioner before this Court, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is liable to be dismissed, as not maintainable.

5. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the petitioner, as well as the respondents and on a perusal of the records available, it is found that an appellate remedy is available to the petitioner to challenge the impugned order of the respondent, dated 29.3.2012, by way of an appeal, as provided under Section 51 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006. As such the present writ petition, filed by the petitioner before this Court, is not maintainable. Therefore, this Writ Petition stands dismissed. However, it would be open to the petitioner to file an appeal before the appropriate authority, as per Section 51 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax, 2006, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such appeal being filed, the appellate authority may dispose of the same, on merits and in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. Index:Yes/No 05.10.2012

Internet:Yes/No

arr

Note: (1) Issue order copy on 08.10.2012

(2)Office is directed to return the original impugned

order to the learned counsel for the petitioner,

after replacing the same with the xerox copy.

M.JAICHANDREN,J.

arr

To

The Commercial Tax Officer,

Vadapalani II Assessment Circle,

No.621, Anna Salai, SIRE Mansion,

Chennai-600 006.

Writ Petition No.18952 of 2012

05.10.2012