TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (10) TMI 182
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....9 ( TNGST Act in short). Since the petitioner approached the Special Committee seeking clarification in respect of assessments for the years 2004-2005 and 2005-2006 under the TNGST Act, two separate orders have been passed rejecting the applications, which has necessitated the petitioner to file the present writ petitions. 3. The petitioner filed returns for the relevant assessment years after which the assessing officer, viz., the second respondent called for the books and checked the accounts and noticed certain defects and omissions. The petitioner thereafter filed Form-XVII Declaration on a portion of the sales turnover and claimed certain payments. While so, on 19.10.2005, the place of business of the petitioner was inspected by the E....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tly clear that the reason for rejection is utterly perverse. The Special Committee has no jurisdiction to comment upon the observation made by the High Court in the earlier writ petitions and the expressions used in the impugned order are condemnable. The Special Committee did not appreciate the observations made by this Court as to what is the power conferred on it under Section 16-D of the TNGST Act. Without reading the order passed by the High Court, the Special Committee, in a most arbitrary and perverted manner, has passed the impugned order. The following two paragraphs, viz. Paragraphs-2 and 5, of the order passed in the earlier writ petitions in W.P.Nos.20849 and 20850 of 2009 dated 22.10.2009 will clearly reveal as to how this Cour....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ne of the three members of the Special Committee had applied their mind to the observations contained in paragraph-2 of the order passed in the earlier writ petitions. Had it been done, then obviously the Committee could not have come to such a conclusion and made such irresponsible observations in the impugned order. All these are sufficient to quash the impugned proceedings. Under normal circumstances, when proceedings are quashed on such a ground, the matter would be remanded to the same authority for fresh consideration. However, in these cases, this Court does not propose to adopt such a procedure as in spite of an earlier direction, the Special Committee has failed to take into consideration of the merits of the matter. The petitioner....