TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (7) TMI 3
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... behalf of sole respondent in all four writ petitions, is before this Court. 3.These writ petitions are listed under the caption 'FOR ADMISSION' in the motion list today. However, with the consent of learned counsel on both sides, the main writ petitions itself are taken up, heard out and are being disposed of. 4.This Court is informed that writ petitioner and sole respondent are same in all the four writ petitions. It is also submitted that all the four writ petitions arise out of a common factual matrix. This court is also informed that while two writ petitions pertain to 'Central Sales Tax' ('CST'), two other writ petitions pertain to 'Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax' ('TNVAT' for brevity). Relevant ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., shall collectively be referred to as 'said assessment years'. 7. Respondent passed an Assessment Order dated 18.04.2018 with regard to said assessment years. It was assailed by the writ petitioner in this Court by way of writ petitions being W.P.No.13830 to 13833 of 2018 and these four writ petitions came to be disposed of by a Hon'ble single Judge of this Court by order dated 08.06.2018. It is not in dispute before this Court that this order dated 08.06.2018 has not been carried in appeal and the same has become final. 8. A perusal of the order reveals that this Court being satisfied that there is violation of 'natural justice principles' (NJP), directed the respondent to do the assessment afresh. The operative port....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nnexures within a time frame of 15 days. Thereafter, this Court had directed the respondent to fix a date for persoanl hearing, hear the authorised representative of the writ petitioner and redo the assessment in accordance with law. There is also a rider that the Assessing Authority shall not be guided by the observations made by the Enforcement Officer and shall take an independent decision in the matter. This is obviously what has now come to stay as Narasus principle [Narasus Roller Flour Mills Vs. Commercial Tax Officer (Enforcement Wing), Sankagiri and Another reported in [2015] 81 VST 560 (Mad)]. It may not be necessary to advert to that in great detail owing to the order that is now being passed. The sequence as directed by this Cou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing upon the writ petitioner to furnish certain documents. To be precise, there is an adumbration of 12 sets of documents, which were specifically asked for. This communication dated 25.02.2019 also makes it clear that those documents are required to verify the correctness of the contentions made by the writ petitioner. 12. In response to this 25.02.2019 notice, writ petitioner sent a reply dated 08.04.2019 inter alia with enclosures. 13. Thereafter, without a personal hearing, the respondent has passed orders on 02.05.2019, 03.05.2019, 20.05.2019 and 21.05.2019 which have been called in question in the instant writ petitions. 14. Though several grounds have been raised in the affidavits filed in support of the writ petitions and though ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Serial No.68 (sub-serial No.27 of Part-B). 17. Per contra, learned Revenue counsel pointed out that it would be a Voltage Stabilizer falling under Serial No.31 of Part -C of First Schedule to TNVAT Act. 18. A perusal of Canon India case reveals that it is a matter touching upon classification of a undisputed product and not on the question of a factual dispute as to what the product itself is. 19. In the instant case, as already alluded to supra, the central issue is the factual dispute as to what the product is? i.e., whether it is Voltage Stabilizer or UPS. 20. Be that as it may, it may not be necessary to advert to this aspect further and make any discussion on this aspect of the matter as this Court considers it appropriate to direc....