LAWS(MAD)-1997-3-8

COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER Vs. T V SUNDARAM IYENGAR

Decided On March 24, 1997
COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER Appellant
V/S
T V SUNDARAM IYENGAR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE above writ appeals have been filed by the Revenue against the common order of a learned single Judge of this Court dated December 13, 1990 in W. P. Nos. 12100, 12101, 12102 and 12103 of 1989, which are being challenged in Writ Appeal Nos. 1172 to 1175 of 1992 respectively. THE four writ petitions related to two assessment years, of which two each pertaining to the levy under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 and the other two under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. THE writ petitions were directed against the orders passed invoking the power under section55 of the Tamil Nadu General sales Tax Act. Though the challenge was on several grounds, the learned single judge was of the view that the respondent/assessee hav e been denied an effective opportunity and therefore, was pleased to allow an opportunity to the assessee to produce the accounts to substantiate their stand. It is against the order, directing the authorities to give a fresh opportunity to the assessee-company for production of the accounts and other records and to redo the assessment for the years 1983-84 and 1984-85, both under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act and the Central Sales Tax Act, that the appeals came to be filed.

(2.) HEARD the learned Government Advocate (Taxes) Mr. T. Mathi, for the appellant s and Mr. C. Natarajan, learned Senior Counsel, for the respondent/assessee. The learned Government advocate (Taxes) with great care and strenuous efforts, contended that the order of the learned single Judge proceeding on the footing that there was a denial of opportunity or that the assessee should be given a further opportunity, is not well merited on the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and that there had been considerable delay already and in spite of the assessing authorities'notices on four occasions, the assessee has not availed of the opportunities given and therefore, this Court ought not to have shown any further indulgence to the Assessee in this regard.