BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 17/08/2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD K.SHARMA W.P.(MD)No.3127 of 2007 and MP(MD)No.1 of 2007 Tvl.P.R.Srinivasan and Sons, represented by its Partner Thiru.P.R.Srinivasan, 604, Main Road, Kovilpatti, Tuticorin District. ..Petitioner Vs 1. The State of Tamil Nadu, represented by its Secretary to Government, Department of Commercial Taxes, Fort.St.George, Chennai - 600 009. 2. The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Second Floor, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005. 3. The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer-II, Ettayapuram Road, Kovilpatti, Tuticorin District. ..Respondents. Prayer Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to exempt the vermicelli Ada from the payment of Tax under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Vax, 2006, without reference to the clarification issued by the second respondent, dated 12.03.2007. !For Petitioner ... M/s.M.Md.Ibrahim Ali ^For Respondents ... Ms.S.Bharathi Govt.Advocate :ORDER
The petitioner has invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court under
Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to challenge the clarification, dated
12.03.2007, addressed to Tvl.Aurofood Private Limited, pointing out that ‘Ada’
and ‘Vermicelli’ were taxable at 12.5% under Part-C of Schedule-II of Tamil
Nadu Value Added Tax, 2006, w.e.f. 01.01.2007.
2. The only ground on which the clarification is challenged by the
petitioner, is that on an earlier occasion, vide letter D.Dis./Acts Cell-
V/23842/95, dated 18.04.1995, addressed to the petitioner, it was clarified that
‘Vermicelli’ and ‘Vermicelli Ada’ were one and the same item, whereas by way of
subsequent impugned notification, this clarification is sought to be
modified/done away with.
3. The contention is misconceived.
4. The impugned clarification deals with ‘Ada’ and ‘Macroni’ which has
nothing to do with ‘Vermicelli’ and ‘Vermicelli Ada’.
5. The clarification is also not addressed to the petitioner nor the
petitioner is manufacturer of ‘Ada’ or ‘Macroni’. Therefore, the petitioner has
no locus standi to challenge the clarification, address to a third party.
6. The Writ Petition being totally misconceived is ordered to be
7. Consequently connected Miscellaneous Petition is dismissed.
8. No costs.
1. The State of Tamil Nadu,
represented by its Secretary
Department of Commercial Taxes,
Chennai – 600 009.
2. The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes,
Second Floor, Ezhilagam,
Chennai – 600 005.
3. The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer-II,