2021 (5) TMI 559

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... public sector undertaking registered under Section 25 of the Companies Act, 1956. Since production of foodgrains had increased and there were not enough godown facilities to store them, in order to increase the storage capacity of the corporation in addition to the available ones, it was proposed to construct additional godowns and to that effect, administrative and financial sanction was accorded by the Government of Tamil Nadu vide G.O.(Ms).No.119, Cooperation, Food and Consumer Protection Department, dated 05.11.2014. 3.Before issuance of the said Government Order, the Hon'ble Chief Minister had made a statement in this regard under Rule 110 of Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly Rules on the floor of the assembly on 06.05.2013. In vie....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n/original adjudicating authority, passed the impugned order confirming the demand set out in the show cause notice. Questioning the same, this writ petition has been filed. 6.The respondents have filed a detailed counter affidavit. In the counter affidavit, the respondents had taken the following three fold stand:- (a) The order impugned in the writ petition is appealable in nature and that a writ petition questioning the same is not maintainable. (b) It is not open to the petitioner to place any reliance on the order dated 09.01.2019 made in Order and Appeal No.16/2019, since the respondents have already filed an appeal (ST/40546/2019) before the Tribunal and therefore, the Order and Appeal cannot be said to have attained finality. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....b) a structure meant predominantly for use as-- (i) an educational establishment; (ii) a clinical establishment; or (iii) an art or cultural establishment; (c) a residential complex predominantly meant for self-use or for the use of their employees or other persons specified in Explanation 1 to clause (44) of section 65B of the said Act, under a contract entered into before the 1st day of March, 2015 and on which appropriate stamp duty, where applicable, had been paid before that date." 8.Therefore, the second respondent clearly erred in proceeding on the premise that the exemption on which, the appellate order was predicated no longer held good. On this sole ground, the order impugned in the writ petition has to go. When the order....