The Commercial Tax Officer Group-Vi Chennai Central Enforcement Chennai 600 006 v. Chief Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Osd)And Another

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM W.P.No.12448 of 2014 & Sree Padmavathy Trading Co., rep. by its Proprietrix, Tmt.S.NirmalaChennai. .. PetitionerVersus 1.The Assistant Commissioner (CT) Manali Assessment Circle Kuralagam Annexe,, Chennai 600 108. 2.The Commercial Tax Officer Group-VI Chennai Central Enforcement Chennai 600 006. .. Respondent Prayer: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of theConstitution of India, seeking for a Writ of Certiorari, tocall for the records on the files of the first respondent inpdl.178/2014/A2 dated 01.04.2013 and connected notice issuedby the 2[nd] respondent in I.F.No.204/2013-14 Group-VI dated08.04.2014 and quash the same as being without jurisdictionand authority of law and contrary to the principles laid downby this Court in the judgment reported in (2007) 295 ITR 303(Mad) (V.Selladurai Vs. Chief Commissioner of Income-Tax (OSD)and another). Heard Mr.R.Senniappan, learned counsel for the petitionerand Mr.Kanmani Annamalai, learned Additional GovernmentPleader appearing for the respondents. With the consent of thelearned counsel appearing on either side, the Writ Petition ishttps://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/taken up for final disposal. 2.The petitioner has filed this Writ Petition challengingthe order passed by the first respondent dated 01.04.2013, andthe consequential memo asking the petitioner to produce thebooks of accounts. The petitioner has challenged the impugnedorder on the ground of violation of principles of naturaljustice. 3.It is stated that when action is initiated undersection 22(4) of the TNVAT Act, the opportunity of personalhearing is mandatory. However, in the instant case, it isseen that the notice issued to the petitioner/dealer hadreturned with postal endorsement “that the premises has beenclosed”. However, it is seen that the memo issued by theEndorsement Wing on the subsequent date i.e. 08.04.2014 wasserved on the Proprietrix in her residential address.Therefore, the first respondent being the Assessing Officercould have resorted to such procedure. 4.In any event, the cancellation of the Registration is avery serious matter as it involves civil consequences.Therefore, this Court is of the view that one more opportunityshould be granted to the petitioner. 5.Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed, theimpugned orders are quashed and the first respondent isdirected to issue show cause notice, within a period of twoweeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order andafter affording a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner,including the opportunity of personal hearing, the firstrespondent shall pass a fresh order in accordance with law andcomplete the assessment. No costs. Consequently, connectedMiscellaneous Petition is closed. //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar rpa To 1.The Assistant Commissioner (T) Manali Assessment Circle Kuralagam Annexure Chennai 108. Manali Assessment Circle Kuralagam Annexure Chennai 108. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2.The Commercial Tax Officer,Group VI, Chennai Central Enforcement,Group VI, Chennai Central Enforcement, 1 cc to The Special Government Pleader, (Taxes), sr.41916 1 cc to M/s.R.Senniappan, Advocate, sr.42313 W.P.No.12448 of 2014 ppa cokra 08.08.2016