C O M M O N O R D E R

WP No.18913 of 2013 is filed questioning the sustainability of the appellate order passed by the third respondent dated 24.05.2013 in AP No.1 of 2013.

2. WP No.18914 of 2013 is filed, calling for the records and quash the impugned notice dated 27.06.2013 made in CST/845546/2007- 2008 passed by the respondent No.2 herein for Assessment Year 2007-2008 proposing the enhancement of the petitioner's taxable turnover for assessment under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act.

3. The petitioner is a Private Limited Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956.

4. The learned Senior Counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, contended that the order impugned is in violation of the provisions of the Sales Tax Act, more specifically, Section 3 and further, the order was passed without providing an opportunity to the writ petitioner. Thus, it is a case of violation of the principles of natural justice and the orders impugned lacks jurisdiction and thus, the writ petitions are to be considered.

5. It is contended that the petitioner was not given notice of the intention of the third respondent to treat the entire turnover of sale involving dealers outside Tamil Nadu as local sales. Section 52(3) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, stipulates that the appellant shall be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

6. Perusal of the orders would reveal that no such opportunity in relation to the proposed assessment was provided to the petitioner's turnover under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, was ever given and the hearing was restricted to the levies confirmed under the Central Sales Tax Act by the fourth respondent. Thus, the orders impugned are unreasonable and in violation of the principles of natural justice.

7. Even the enhancement of turnover was made by the third respondent in the appeal without issuing any separate notice to the petitioner and by affording opportunity to establish their case. Even on that count, the writ petitions are to be considered.

8. The learned Senior Counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, solicited the attention of this Court with reference to the findings made by the Appellate Authority and reiterated that the opportunity of being heard was denied and therefore, the impugned orders are liable to be set aside.

9. Regarding the order passed by this Court on 29.03.2021 in WP No.18071 of 2013 [M/s.Saint Gobain Glass India Ltd vs. The Appellate Joint Commissioner (CT) and another], the learned Senior Counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, is of an opinion that the factual issues raised pertinently in these writ petitions may not have any straight application with reference to the findings in the abovesaid judgment and based on the abovesaid judgment, these writ petitions need not be considered.

10. In M/s.Saint Gobain Glass India Ltd's case (cited supra), this Court has upheld the actions of the respondents. However, in these writ petitions, the ground regarding violation of principles of natural justice and other factual grounds, are also raised.

11. The learned Government Advocate, appearing on behalf of the respondents, opposed the said contentions of the learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner by stating that the issues raised by the petitioner are elaborately adjudicated by the Appellate Authority in the impugned orders. If at all the petitioner is aggrieved, it is for them to prefer an appeal before the Tribunal as contemplated under the provisions of the Act. Thus, these writ petitions are to be rejected.

12. When an appellate remedy is available to the petitioner under the provisions of the Act, the High Court need not adjudicate the disputed facts on merits. The Tamil Nadu Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal is empowered to adjudicate jurisdictional issues, factual disputes, legal grounds, including violation of principles of natural justice. Undoubtedly, the High Court may entertain a writ petition, if any direct violation of principles of