TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 1405X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt has chosen to reiterate the deficiencies already pointed out in the deficiency memo, as the reason for rejecting the refund application, without considering the explanation given by the petitioner, as to how such deficiencies pointed out by the respondent are either improper or not warranted. Therefore, this court is of the view that the respondent should consider the application already filed by the petitioner once again on merits. Appeal allowed by way of remand. - W.P. No. 23242 of 2018 and W.M.P. No. 27125 of 2018 - - - Dated:- 17-9-2018 - Mr K. Ravichandrabaabu, J. For The Appellant : P. Rajkumar For The Respondents : R. Hemalatha, Senior Standing Counsel ORDER K. Ravichandrabaabu, J. 1. The pet ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... respondent is not justified in reiterating the very same reasons in the impugned order, without looking into the contentions raised by the petitioner in the reply dated July 13, 2018. Apart from saying so, the learned counsel further contended that the respondent ought to have given personal hearing to the petitioner, as he has not chosen to accept the reasons stated in the reply. 4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent based on written instruction submitted that when the deficiencies are pointed out through the memo dated July 4, 2018, the petitioner should have filed a fresh refund application instead of asking the respondent to consider the application filed already. Even though it is stated so, the learned couns ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... spondent should consider the application already filed by the petitioner once again on merits based on the petitioner's reply dated July 13, 2018 and also after affording a personal hearing to the petitioner. Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed and the impugned order is set aside. Consequently, the matter is remitted back to the respondent for passing a fresh order on merits and in accordance with law, after considering the petitioner's reply dated July 13, 2018 and also by affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner. The whole exercise shall be done by the respondent within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. The connected miscellaneous petition is closed. - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
