SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2008 Supreme(Mad) 3910

High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAJESWARAN
Tvl. Shyam Air Fridge
Versus
The Tamilnadu Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Rep. By its Secretary & Another
W.P.No.24140 of 2008 and M.P.No.1 of 2008
Decided On : 30-10-2008

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:K. Soundararajan, Advocate.
For the Respondents: R. Mahadevan, Addl.Govt.Pleader(Tax).

The discretion of the Tribunal to transfer a case to an Additional Bench for want of quoram, as provided in the regulations, influenced the court's decision.

Headnote:

Certiorarified Mandamus - Transfer of Case - The court allowed the writ petition by quashing the order passed by the first respondent and directing the transfer of the application to an Additional Bench for hearing, preventing penalty proceedings against the petitioner until the case is heard on merits.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, a dealer in Home Appliances, disputed the assessment of contract receipt by the second respondent, leading to an appeal and subsequent delay in hearing due to lack of quoram in the first respondent Tribunal.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the Tribunal had the discretion to transfer the case to an Additional Bench for want of quoram, which was not exercised, leading the petitioner to approach the court for relief.

Issues: Dispute over assessment of contract receipt, delay in hearing due to lack of quoram, and rejection of transfer of the case to an Additional Bench.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the failure of the Tribunal to exercise its discretion to transfer the case to an Additional Bench, as provided in the regulations.

Final Decision: The writ petition was allowed, quashing the order passed by the first respondent and directing the transfer of the application to an Additional Bench for hearing, with a stay on penalty proceedings until the case is heard on merits.

Judgment :-

The writ petition is filed for issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the first respondent in N.Dis.No.9458/2008/A2 dated 19. 2008 and to quash the same.

2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is a dealer in Home Appliances and during the assessment year 2004-2005, the petitioner had reported a turnover Rs.56,47,042/- in which the petitioner had shown contract receipt of Rs.3,74,000/- @ 4%. The second respondent assessed the said contract receipt @ 20% treating the same as a sale of Air Conditioner and on that basis, the tax was imposed at the rate of 20% apart from the penalty under the Act. Disputing the liability, an appeal was filed by the petitioner before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the same was modified. The petitioner further filed 2nd appeal, after paying entire tax dues and disputed penalty refixed by the Appellate Authority. The said appeal was filed with a delay of 45 days. The first respondent also numbered the said petition and listed for hearing before the first respondent. Since there is no quoram in the first respondent Tribunal, the said petition could not be taken up for hearing. According to the petitioner, as per Regulation 11(3) of the Tamilnadu Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal Regulations, the Chairman has got the discretion to transfer the case for disposal before another Bench. The petitioner filed a stay application for recovery of penalty amount and sought for the transfer of that miscellaneous application for disposal from the main Bench to the additional Bench. But the same has been rejected. Hence, the above writ petition for the above said prayer.

3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. R. Mahadevan, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. I have also gone through the documents filed in support of their submissions.

4. It is a case of rejecting the petitioners petition to transfer the miscellaneous application by the Tamilnadu Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal where the appeal has not been taken up for want of quoram. However, as per the regulation 11(3) to the Tamilnadu Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal Regulations, the Chairman has got the discretion to transfer the same to the Additional Bench for want of quoram. Instead of doing that, the same has been dismissed necessitating the petitioner to approach this Court for the relief. The learned counsel for the respondent department also submits that as per the provisions of Tamilnadu Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal regulations, the Tribunal has to pass suitable orders transferring the case to another Bench. Admittedly, the same has not been done in this case. Therefore, I allow the writ petition by quashing the order passed by the first respondent in N.Dis.No.9458/2008/A2 dated 19. 2008 and direct the first respondent to consider and transfer the application dated 25.08.2008 filed by the petitioner to Additional Bench immediately to enable him to have a hearing before the said Bench. Till the petition is transferred and heard on merits by the Additional Bench, the department shall not proceed with the penalty proceedings against the petitioner.

5. With the above direction, the writ petition is allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.


Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top