IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATE: 23.03.2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN Writ Petition No.5157 of 2011 and M.p.nos.1 and 2 of 2011 Say Leathers New No.75/10, Perianna Mastry Street, Periamet, Chennai 600 003. Represented by its Proprietor R.Abdul Sadique Son of Rafeeque Sahib No.3/2, Abdul Shukur Street, Pudupet, Chennai 600 002. .. Petitioner. Versus The Assistant Commissioner, (Commercial Taxes) Periamet Assessment Circle, No.3, Ritherton Avenue, Chennai 600 007. .. Respondent. Prayer: Petition filed seeking for a writ of Certiorari, to call for the records pertaining to the order dated 30.06.2010 in proceedings bearing No.PDL/178/2010-A2 duly issued by the Assistant Commissioner (Commercial Taxes), Periamet Assessment Circle, Chennai 600 007, the respondent herein and quash the same. For Petitioner : Mr.D.Ashok Kumar For Respondent : Mr.R.Mahadevan Additional Government Pleader (T) O R D E R
Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader (T) appearing on behalf the respondent.
2. The main contention of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner is that the registration of the petitioner had been cancelled, without the petitioner being given an opportunity of being heard. The reason stated by the respondent, in the impugned order, is that the petitioner had filed the returns only upto the month of September, 2009, and on physical verification, it had been found that the petitioner was not carrying on the business in the address furnished by the petitioner, for getting the registration certificate. He had further submitted that, the provisions of Rule 19 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Rules, 2007, for service of notices, summons and orders, had not been followed by the respondent, before cancelling the registration of the petitioner had been cancelled
3. The learned Additional Government Pleader (T) appearing on behalf of the respondent, had not been in a position to show that the provisions of Rule 19 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Rules, 2007, had been followed by the respondent before cancelling the registration of the petitioner.
4. In such circumstances, the impugned order of the respondent, in so far as it relates to the cancellation of the registration of the petitioner, is set aside. However, the petitioner is directed to appear before the respondent, within a period of 15 days from today and to file the monthly returns, till date, as per the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, and to produce all the necessary records to show that the petitioner is carrying on its business at the address shown in the registration certificate. On such production of the monthly returns and the necessary documents, the respondent shall pass appropriate orders thereon, as per law. However, if the petitioner fails to comply with the above directions, it would be open to the respondent to initiate appropriate actiion against the petitioner, for the cancellation of the registration, following the procedures established by law.
The writ petition is ordered accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
cse
To
The Assistant Commissioner,
(Commercial Taxes)
Periamet Assessment Circle,
No.3, Ritherton Avenue,
Chennai 600 007