Ms.P.A.E.Ltd Vs. the Assistant Commissioner (Ct)

Ms.P.A.E.Ltd vs The Assistant Commissioner (Ct)

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Feb 28, 2012

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/926297

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/926297
Court: Chennai High Court
Judge: M.Jaichandren, J.
Decided On: Feb 28, 2012
Case Number: Writ Petition No.29239 of 2011
Subject: Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue: Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Ms.P.A.E.Ltd

Advocate Mr.S.Ramanathan, Adv.

Respondent

The Assistant Commissioner (Ct)

Advocate Mr.A.R.Jayaprathap, Adv.

Excerpt

prayer: petition filed seeking for a writ of certiorari, calling for the records of the respondent in his proceedings in tin no.33360600081/2007-08, dated 3.11.2011 and quash the same as illegal.order1. heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent.2. at this stage of the hearing of the writ petition, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had submitted that the impugned order of the respondent, dated 3.11.2011, in so far as it relates to the issue relating to the reversal of the input tax credit, in respect of the stock transfer and the corresponding penalty imposed thereon, under section 27(4) of the tamilnadu value added tax act, 2006, has to be set aside, in view of the fact that the notice, dated 25.5.2011, issued by the respondent, does not contain any proposal relating to the said issue.3. the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent had also accepted the said contention made on behalf of the petitioner.4. in view of the above, the impugned order of the respondent, dated 3.11.2011, in so far as it relates to the issue relating to the reversal of the input tax credit, in respect of the stock transfer and the corresponding penalty, is set aside. however, it is made clear that it would be open to the respondent to issue a fresh notice, if so advised, relating to the reversal of the input tax credit, in respect of the stock transfer and the corresponding penalty and pass appropriate orders thereon. on receipt of such notice, if any, the petitioner shall raise its objections, within the time stipulated in the said notice. the writ petition is ordered accordingly. no costs. consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Full Judgment

Prayer: Petition filed seeking for a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records of the respondent in his proceedings in TIN No.33360600081/2007-08, dated 3.11.2011 and quash the same as illegal.

ORDER

1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

2. At this stage of the hearing of the writ petition, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had submitted that the impugned order of the respondent, dated 3.11.2011, in so far as it relates to the issue relating to the reversal of the Input Tax Credit, in respect of the stock transfer and the corresponding penalty imposed thereon, under Section 27(4) of the Tamilnadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, has to be set aside, in view of the fact that the notice, dated 25.5.2011, issued by the respondent, does not contain any proposal relating to the said issue.

3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent had also accepted the said contention made on behalf of the petitioner.

4. In view of the above, the impugned order of the respondent, dated 3.11.2011, in so far as it relates to the issue relating to the reversal of the Input Tax Credit, in respect of the stock transfer and the corresponding penalty, is set aside. However, it is made clear that it would be open to the respondent to issue a fresh notice, if so advised, relating to the reversal of the Input Tax Credit, in respect of the stock transfer and the corresponding penalty and pass appropriate orders thereon. On receipt of such notice, if any, the petitioner shall raise its objections, within the time stipulated in the said notice. The writ petition is ordered accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Same Court & Year Chennai · 2012 Same Parties Ms.P.A.E.Ltd vs The Assistant Commissioner (Ct) Same Subject Land Acquisition Same Judge M.Jaichandren, J.