Https://Hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/Hcservices v. Chiefcommissioner Of Income Tax (Osd) And Another

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 20.6.2016 CORAM : The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM Writ Petition Nos.26125 to 26129 & 26678 to 26682 of 2015& all connected pending MPs V.Krishnamoorthy, Contractor,Madhusamy & Sons, rep.by its Partner M.Gandhi K.Marigounder, Contractor ...Petitioner inWP.26125/2015...Petitioner in WP.26126/2015...Petitioner inWP.26127/2015 R.Murugesan, Contractor KRM Contractors, rep.by its Partner R.MuruganC.Velu, Contractor Sri K.Vaithilingam ContractorsS.S.Engineering Contractor,rep.by its Partner S.Selvam C.Appusamy Contractor V.NavaneethakrishnanContractors ...Petitioner inWP.26128/2015...Petitioner in WP.26129/2015 ...Petitioner in WP.26678/2015...Petitioner inWP.26679/2015...Petitioner inWP.26680/2015 ...Petitioner inWP.26681/2015...Petitioner in WP.26682/2015Vs The Assistant Commissioner (CT),Omalur Assessment Circle, Omalur,Salem District. ...Respondent in all the WPs https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ PETITIONS under Article 226 of The Constitution of Indiapraying for the issuance of Writs of Certiorari to call for therecords on the files of the respondent respectively in (i) TIN :33673244082/2012-13dated22.4.2015;(ii)TIN:33923244381/2012-13 dated 20.4.2015; (iii) TIN : 33143245974/2012-13 dated 22.4.2015; (iv) TIN : 33373243471/2012-13 dated22.4.2015; (v) TIN : 33673246604/2012-13 dated 22.4.2015; (vi)TIN : 33843243746/2012-13 dated 20.4.2015; (vii) TIN :33183243236/2012-13dated22.4.2015;(viii)TIN:33103243280/2012-13dated20.4.2015;(ix)TIN:33443243093/2012-13 dated 23.3.2015; and (x) TIN : 33743243801/2012-13 dated 20.4.2015 and quash the same as being contrary tothe principle laid down by this Court in the judgment reportedin (2007) 295 ITR 303 (Mad.) (V.Selladurai Vs. ChiefCommissioner of Income Tax (OSD) and another). For Petitioners: Mr.R.SenniappanFor Respondent : Mr.V.Haribabu, AGP COMMON ORDERHeard both. By consent, the writ petitions are taken up forfinal disposal. 2. The petitioners, who are registered contractors of thePublic Works Department and who are registered dealers on thefile of the respondent under the provisions of the Tamil NaduValue Added Tax Act, 2006, have filed these writ petitions,challenging the orders of assessment for 2012-13. 3. Two grounds have been raised by the learned counsel forthe petitioners. First is that the impugned orders have beenpassed without affording an opportunity of personal hearing. Insupport of his contention, reliance has been placed on thedecision of the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in the caseof V.Selladurai Vs. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD) andanother [(2007) 295 ITR 303]. 4. The second ground raised by the learned counsel for thepetitioners is that the petitioner had filed monthly returns andalso paid tax and after due verification, the previousincumbent, who was functioning as the Assistant Commissioner(CT), Omalur Assessment Circle, was satisfied with the returnsand issued certificates under Form S. The respondent erroneouslyobserved in the impugned orders that no monthly returns havebeen filed and that the petitioners have not reported theturnover liable to tax. 5. In the light of the fact that the petitioners have notbeen afforded an opportunity of personal hearing as mandated andas pointed out by the Hon'ble Division Bench in the above https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ referred to decision, this Court is of the view that the mattersshould be decided afresh after due opportunity to thepetitioners. 5. In the light of the fact that the petitioners have notbeen afforded an opportunity of personal hearing as mandated andas pointed out by the Hon'ble Division Bench in the above https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ referred to decision, this Court is of the view that the mattersshould be decided afresh after due opportunity to thepetitioners. 6. Accordingly, the writ petitions are allowed, theimpugned orders are set aside and the matters are remitted backto the respondent for fresh consideration. The respondent isdirected to afford an opportunity of personal hearing to thepetitioners. While doing so, the respondent shall verify as tothe correctness of the submissions made by the petitioners thatthey filed returns and paid taxes and that the officerconcerned, having been satisfied with the same, had issued thecertificates under Form S. The respondent can call for theentire files relating to the petitioners and thereafter proceedin accordance with law. The petitioners are at liberty toexercise their option under Section 6 of the said Act, whichshall be considered on merits and in accordance with law. Nocosts. Consequently, the above MPs are closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS II) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar To The Assistant Commissioner (CT), Omalur Assessment Circle, Omalur,Salem District. +2ccs to Mr.R. Senniappan, Advocate, S.R.No.34149, 34150+1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.34339, 34345 sCD(CO)EU(27/06/2016) WP.Nos.26125 to 26129 &26678 to 26682 of 2015 &all connected pending MPs