PRATHAM AUTOMOBILES Vs. DEPUTY COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER KANCHEEPURAM NORTH TAX ASSESSMENT CIRCLE KANCHEEPURAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, has challenged the order dated 19. 09. 2007of the respondent thereby cancelling the sales tax registration of the petitioner firm.

(2.) THE brief facts leading to the writ petition is as follows: the petitioner has submitted that he is a dealer to Honda Motor Cycles and Scooters etc. in the name and style of M/s. Pratham Automobiles. The firm has a show room for display of its motor bikes, scooters and othr accessories at Plot Nos. 252 and 253, comprised in R. S. Nos. 121/1, 138/4, 139, 140, 141/1, 142, 145/3 to 6, 72/2, in all measuring a total extent of 22. 39 acres. The above said survey numbers are comprised in a lay out approved by the Town and country Planning Authority under C. S. A. R. D. T. P. No. 220-87/l. P. 164. The property in plot Nos. 252 and 253, totally measuring 7,800 square feet of vacant site was purchased in the name of S. G. Ashok Kumar, who is none other than the brother of Deepak Kumar, a partner in the said firm. He has revenue records and other title deeds in his name. The petitioner firm is in possession of the property under a deed of declaration date 01. 12. 2005 executed by S. G. Ashok Kumar in favour of the partner R. Deepak Kumar. The petitioner firm has put up a superstructure after obtaining the necessary licence and permission, in a portion of the leased site at a costs of Rs. 40 lakhs and is running a show room there. After obtaining the dealership number from the Commercial Tax for the principal place of business and for the additional place of business, the petitioner had been diligently doing business in the said premises. In these circumstances, with an ulterior motive, the residents of Kancheepuram Kanaga Durgai amman Nagar and Annai Indira Nagar Residents Association at Konerikuppam, Ponnerikarai, seemed to have made representations in writing on 22. 2. 2007 alleging that the two dealers show room have been put up by the petitioner on the play ground owned by the Government. On the basis of the said representation, the Commissioner of Right to Information Act, had instructed orally to cancel the registration of the petitioner's show room. Pursuant to the said oral instructions, the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Kancheepuram, the respondent herein, issued a show cause notice on 22. 08. 2007, calling upon the petitioner to submit his explanation as to how he had located the show room in the disputed place said to be a play ground allotted by the Government.

(3.) THE petitioner has submitted his detailed explanation on 10. 09. 2007 stating that the construction of show room was duly authorised by the competent authorities and that the Commissioner of Right to Information, has no jurisdiction to issue any oral instruction to the respondent for cancellation of the registration of the show room given under the Taxation Act. Without considering his explanation in a proper perspective the respondent has cancelled the registration in a cryptic manner and, therefore, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition for the relief stated above.