Tvl. Rajeswari Thermoplast vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Before: and
Heard both sides. 2.The petitioner had suffered the impugned order at the hands of the respondent. It is an ex parte order. The petitioner states that since notice was served only through on-line portal, the petitioner was not aware of the same. 3.The learned Government Advocate submits that in similar matters, reliefs were granted by directing the assessee to deposit 25% of the disputed tax amount. 2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
The petitioner states that they will deposit 25% of the disputed tax amount through electronic cash ledger within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Upon such compliance, the attachment effected on the petitioner's ITC account shall be raised forthwith. The impugned order shall stand quashed. The petitioner shall thereafter reply to the show cause notice within a period of thirty days thereafter. The respondent shall provide an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner and pass final order within a period of two months thereafter. If the petitioner fails to deposit and offer his reply to the show cause notice within the aforesaid period, the benefit of this order would stand automatically recalled and the order impugned in the writ petition can very well be enforced. 5.This Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
2025
NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No MGA 3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J. MGA To The Assistant Commissioner (ST), Tuticorin III Assessment Circle, Tuticorin.
2025 4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Reproduced from the public record of the Madras High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.