M/s. Dev Indus Paints rep. by its Proprietor K. Revathy Versus The Commissioner (CT), Commercial Taxes Department And The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer
GST
2018 (9) TMI 683 – MADRAS HIGH COURT – 2019 (20) G. S. T. L. 45 (Mad.)
MADRAS HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 9-7-2018
Writ Petition No. 17029 of 2018 & WMP. No. 20280 of 2018
GST
Mr. T. S. Sivagnanam J.
For the Petitioner : Mr.P.Suresh
For the Respondents : Mr.J.Kumaran, GA
ORDER
Mr.J.Kumaran, learned Government Advocate accepts notice for the respondents. Heard both. By consent, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal.
2. The petitioner has challenged a show cause notice dated 16.1.2018 and the consequential attachment of the bank account for recover
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
have been passed in respect of the relevant years. The learned Government Advocate, on instructions from the officer, who is present in court, has informed that the assessment orders have not been passed in respect of all the three relevant assessment years. Then, there cannot be a demand notice nor there can be any attachment of the petitioner's bank account.
6. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed, the impugned notice is set aside and Form U notice issued to the petitioner's banker is also set aside. Consequently, there will be a direction to the respondents to return the cheques collected from the petitioner. This direction shall be complied with within 3 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. After the cheq
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =