TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Court dismisses challenge to registration cancellation under Sales Tax Act, holds cancellation stands despite compliance.</h1> <h3>Mallika Traders Versus Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Sattur, Virudhunagar District</h3> The court dismissed the writ petition challenging the cancellation of the registration certificate for non-payment of additional security deposit under ... - Issues:1. Cancellation of registration certificate under Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 for non-payment of additional security deposit.Analysis:The petitioner, a manufacturer of hand-made matches and fireworks, was issued a notice demanding a significant sum along with surcharge. The petitioner was directed to provide additional security representing 50% of the tax demanded. Failure to comply led to the cancellation of the registration certificate by the respondent. The petitioner challenged this action through a writ petition and obtained an interim order staying further proceedings upon depositing a specified amount.Subsequently, the petitioner filed a writ appeal, which partially allowed the appeal and modified the interim order by allowing the petitioner to furnish security instead of making a deposit. The petitioner complied with this order by providing the security and was subsequently assessed for sales tax on the goods. The assessed tax was duly paid, and there are no outstanding dues under the Act.The original writ petition was later dismissed as withdrawn, leading to the impugned order by the respondent, which was based on the dismissal of the writ petition. The petitioner's counsel argued that the cancellation order should be considered withdrawn due to the actions taken post the writ appeal. However, the court held that all interim orders merge with the final order, and the cancellation order could not be deemed withdrawn merely because the writ petition was dismissed.The court emphasized that the petitioner could not reopen the matter based on a misconception leading to the withdrawal of the earlier writ petition. The proper course of action would have been to seek withdrawal of concession based on subsequent facts. Filing a second writ petition on the same cause of action after the unconditional withdrawal of the initial writ petition was not permissible. Consequently, the court dismissed the writ petition but allowed the petitioner to seek appropriate legal remedies if advised to revive the previous writ petition in accordance with the law.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
