Court dismisses writ petitions challenging filing notices within 15 days, criticizes petitioner for delay tactics. Emphasizes presenting merits to authority.

The court dismissed the writ petitions challenging notices requiring the petitioner to file objections within 15 days. The judgment criticized the petitioner for resorting to repeated writ petitions to delay proceedings unjustly and failing to engage effectively despite opportunities provided. The court emphasized the importance of presenting grounds on merits before the competent authority rather than through routine writ petitions. The respondents were given a final opportunity for a personal hearing, with a warning that non-compliance could result in the authority proceeding with the assessment and issuing final orders.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to notices requesting petitioner to file objections within 15 days; Compliance with court directions; Allegations against respondents under Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act; Entertaining writ against show cause notice; Prolonged litigation due to repeated writ petitions; Failure to avail opportunities provided by authority.

Analysis:
The primary issue in this case revolves around the challenge to notices issued to the petitioner, requiring them to submit objections within 15 days. The petitioner argues that they were not granted a proper opportunity to defend their case before the assessment order was hurriedly passed. This contention is supported by the petitioner's need to scrutinize records for a robust defense. Additionally, the petitioner highlights previous court directions that were not adhered to by the respondents, suggesting non-compliance with legal procedures.

Another aspect of the case involves allegations that the respondents acted against the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act. The petitioner raises concerns regarding the merits of the case, emphasizing that such issues should be addressed with reference to original documents and evidence, rather than through writ petitions challenging notices.

The judgment emphasizes that writs against show cause notices should only be entertained in exceptional circumstances, such as incompetence or malafides on the part of the issuing authority. The court underscores the importance of presenting grounds on merits before the competent authority for proper adjudication, rather than through routine writ petitions.

A detailed timeline of actions taken by the respondents is presented, showcasing the efforts made to engage with the petitioner and gather necessary information for assessment purposes. Despite multiple reminders and opportunities provided, the petitioner's failure to engage effectively is noted, leading to a prolonged legal process due to repeated writ petitions.

Ultimately, the court criticizes the petitioner for resorting to a strategic approach of filing successive writ petitions to prolong the issue unjustly. The judgment highlights the petitioner's failure to avail themselves of opportunities provided by the authority for a fair defense. As a result, the court dismisses the writ petitions, directing the petitioner to submit their defense statement and documents, with the respondents given one final opportunity for a personal hearing. Failure to comply may lead to the authority proceeding with the assessment and issuing final orders in accordance with the law.

---