Ramapuram, Chennai - 89 v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Porur Assessment Circle
High Court
30 Oct 2015 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · hc_cis_mas
Parties
Ramapuram, Chennai - 89 v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Porur Assessment Circle
Date of order
30 Oct 2015
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Ramapuram, Chennai - 89 v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Porur Assessment Circle, the High Court (2015) decided the matter.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN
Tvl.Marc Enterprises,represented by its Accounts Manager,Mr.S.Radhakrishnan,No.3/71, Thiruvalluvar Salai
Ramapuram, Chennai - 89 .. Petitioner
Vs
1.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Porur Assessment Circle, No.65/1, Kundrathur Main Road, Madanandapuram, Chennai - 125.
2.The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), Chennai (South), 3rd Floor, PAPJM Annexe, No.1, Greams Road,
Chennai - 6 .. Respondents
Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitutionof India seeking a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records ofthe second respondent proceedings in N.Dis No.1059/2015/A1 dated08.10.2015 and quash it as illegal and arbitrary.
Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner andthe learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for therespondents.
https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for thepetitioner that an appeal petition was filed within time as perSection 51 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006.Thereafter, after complying with the defects pointed out by therespondent, the appeal petition was re-presented. However,the second respondent, without giving an opportunity of personalhearing to the petitioner, rejected the appeal petition on theground of delay in re-presentation. Hence the present WritPetition.
3. Considering the facts of the case, and having satisfiedwith the reasons adduced in the affidavit for delay inrepresentation, this Court is inclined to condone the delay.In view of the same, the impugned order is set aside and thesecond respondent is directed to entertain and number the Appealif it is otherwise in order and dispose of the Appeal on meritsand in accordance with law after affording due opportunity ofhearing to the petitioner. Accordingly, the Writ Petition isallowed. No costs.
-s/d-Assistant RegistrarTrue CopySub-Assistant Registrar
To1.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Porur Assessment Circle, No.65/1, Kundrathur Main Road, Madanandapuram, Chennai - 125.
2.The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), Chennai (South), 3rd Floor, PAPJM Annexe, No.1, Greams Road, Chennai - 6.
+1 cc to Mr.M.Desingu Advocate sr.59376+1 cc to Special Government Pleader (Taxes)High Court Madras sr.59789
aa19/11/2015
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.