M/S.millions Fashions v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax Muthialpet Assessment Circle Thambu Chetty Street Chennai-1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN M/s.Millions Fashions ... Petitioner in all the Petitionsrep. by its Proprietor New No.79 Old No.41 Coral Merchant Street Chennai-600 001 Vs The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Muthialpet Assessment Circle Thambu Chetty Street Chennai-1 ... Respondentin all the Petitions Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of Indiato issue a Writ of certiorari to call for the records of therespondent in the impugned order in TIN No.3378122087/2006-2007 to2013-2014 respectively dated 27.2.2015 quash the same as violativeof Section 22 and Section 27 of the TNVAT Act 2006 and violative ofthe principles of natural justice For Petitioner : Ms.Radhika Chandra Sekhar in all the Petitions For Respondent : Mr.V.Haribabu, AGP(T) in all the Petitions Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learnedGovernment Advocate (Taxes), who took notice for the respondent. 2. These writ petitions have been filed challenging the orders ofthe respondent dated 27.02.2015. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3. It is the grievance of the petitioner Company that neither anopportunity was given to file its objections nor an opportunity ofbeing personally heard was given to them before passing the impugnedorders. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in thenotices dated 23.01.2015 proposing to impose tax on imported cottonfabric, the authority has made it clear that objections if any bythe petitioner may be filed within 15 days from the date of receiptof such notices and that they are entitled to avail personal hearingin this connection, if they desire, within the time stipulated supra.According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, pursuant to thesame, the petitioner has sought four weeks' time vide letters dated10.02.2015, which were received by the respondent on the same day.However, the respondent, without passing orders on the request of thepetitioners vide letters dated 10.02.2015, passed the impugned orderson 27.02.2015. 4. The notices dated 23.01.2015 cannot be said to be incorrectsince proper wordings have been used in the last paragraph of thesaid notices, wherein the petitioner has been asked to submit itsobjections and also to avail personal hearing within 15 days from thedate of receipt of such notices and hence, the petitioner cannot saythat an opportunity of being heard was not given. But, according tothe petitioner, the notices dated 23.01.2015 were received by thepetitioner on 27.01.2015 and the petitioner has sought for time forfour weeks on 10.02.2015, within 15 days as mentioned in theoriginal notices. When that being the case, without accepting orrejecting the request of the petitioner, the authority has proceededto pass orders within the time sought for by the petitioner expiresviz., within four weeks from the date of receipt of the notices.Hence, I am of the considered view that the writ petitions have tobe allowed on the ground that the authority has passed the impugnedorders without passing an order on the requests of the petitionerdated 10.02.2015, which were made within 15 days from the date ofreceipt of the original notices dated 23.01.2015. 5. In view of the above, the writ petitions are allowed and theimpugned orders dated 27.02.2015 are set aside. The matters areremitted back to the authority to consider the case of the petitionerafresh on merits and in accordance with law. The petitioner shallfile its objections if any on or before 30.04.2015 and arepresentative of the petitioner Company shall appear before theauthority on 04.05.2015 and on such appearance, the respondent isdirected to consider the the case of the petitioner and aftergiving the petitioner an opportunity of being heard on 04.05.2015,the respondent shall pass appropriate orders on merits and inaccordance with law within a period of four weeks thereafter. If the petitioner fails to avail the opportunity mentioned supra, forany reason whatsoever, the authority is empowered to pass orders onmerits and in accordance with law, without being influenced by theorders that are set aside by this Court. The writ petitions are disposed of with the above direction. Nocosts. Connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant RegistrarrgToThe Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Muthialpet Assessment Circle Thambu Chetty Street Chennai-1+8cc's to Mr.K.Vaitheeswaran, Advocate, S.R.No.17152+1cc to the Special Government Pleader, S.R.No.17313W.P.Nos.8730 to 8737 of 2015KSJ(CO)CA(07/04/2015)