LAWS(MAD)-2018-7-116

TVL EMPEE DISTILLERIES LTD Vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES LARGE TAX PAYERS UNIT CHENNAI

Decided On July 04, 2018
Tvl Empee Distilleries Ltd Appellant
V/S
Additional Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes Large Tax Payers Unit Chennai Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr.R.Ganesh Kanna, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms.Narmadha Sampath, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr.M.Hariharan, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

(2.) This writ petition has been filed challenging a memo issued by the first respondent dated 19.06.2018, by which the delay in filing the revision was declined to be condoned on the ground that it is statutorily impermissible to do so. The petitioner/Assessee is already under litigation before this Court in respect of the Sales Tax arrears and the said writ petition in W.P.No.3991 of 2018 is being heard by this Court. Apart from that, there is also an order passed in a Civil Suit, namely C.S.No.161 of 2018 in Application No.2215 of 2018 dated 19.03.2018 filed by M/s.Gimpex Private Limited, in which the petitioner herein is the first defendant. A Garnishee application has been taken out in the said suit, wherein a prohibitory order was granted restraining TASMAC from effecting any payments to the appellants, which includes the petitioner herein vide order dated 28.03.2018. On appeal before a Division Bench of this Court in O.S.A.No.155 of 2018, the said order was confirmed by judgment dated 04.06.2018, except to the extent that there was a clarification that the prohibitory order should be construed to mean to the extent of the suit claim and if any excess amount is payable by the Garnishee to the appellants can be clarified and paid. Thus, I find that there are circumstances, which pervented the petitioner from persuing the claim before the first respondent at the appropriate time.

(3.) Therefore, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to exercise discretion to condone the delay of 5 days in filing the revision. However, it is made clear that this order shall not be treated as a precedent and has been passed taking into consideration the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case.