High Court Madras High Court

M/S.Noyyal Common Effluent vs The Assistant Commissioner (Ct) on 12 January, 2011

Madras High Court
M/S.Noyyal Common Effluent vs The Assistant Commissioner (Ct) on 12 January, 2011
       

  

  

 
 
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATE: 12-01-2011

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN

Writ Petition No.186 of 2011 and
M.P.No.1 of 2011

M/s.Noyyal Common Effluent
Treatment Company Limited
Shop No.2, P.R.Complex,
Door No.47, Binny Compound Main Road,
Tirupur-641 601,
Represented by
Mr.S.Selvakumar, Director.						.. Petitioner.

Versus

The Assistant Commissioner (CT)
Tirupur Central I Assessment Circle,
Tirupur.									.. Respondent.


Prayer: Petition filed seeking for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the respondent in TIN 33092403702, dated 14.9.2010, and quash the same as contrary to law, with a direction to the respondent to re-do the assessment.

		For Petitioner	  : Mr.Hema Muralikrishnan

		For Respondent     : Mr.R.Mahadevan (AGP) 


O R D E R

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader, appearing on behalf of the respondent.

2. The main contention of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner is that the respondent had passed the impugned order, without giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. She had also stated that a single order had been passed, for four different assessment years, even though it is not permissible in law.

3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent had not refuted the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner.

4. In such circumstances, the impugned order of the first respondent, dated 14.9.2010, is set aside. However, it is made clear that the respondent may issue separate notices to the petitioner, for the four different assessment years and pass appropriate orders thereon, on merits and in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, on the objections raised by the petitioner and taking into consideration the relevant records submitted by the petitioner, at the time of the hearing.

The writ petition is ordered accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

csh

To

The Assistant Commissioner (CT)
Tirupur Central I Assessment Circle,
Tirupur