Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2011 DIGILAW 1991 (MAD)

P. Manishankar v. Assistant Commissioner (Ct) Nanganallur

2011-04-07

M.JAICHANDREN

body2011
Judgment :- 1. The main contention of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is that the petitioner could not produce the relevant documents and to raise the necessary objections before the impugned assessment order had been passed by the respondent, since, the petitioner could not trace the said documents, within time. Therefore, he had submitted that it would suffice if the impugned assessment order of the respondent, dated 29.12.2010, is set aside and if an opportunity is given to the petitioner to produce all the relevant documents and to raise his necessary objections before the respondent, who is the assessing officer, and if the respondent is directed to consider the same and pass appropriate orders thereon, on merits and in accordance with law. 2. The learned Additional Government Pleader (Taxes) appearing on behalf of the respondent, has no objection for such an order being passed by this Court. 3. Hence, the impugned assessment order of the respondent, dated 29.12.2010, is set aside and the petitioner is permitted to submit all the relevant records and to raise the necessary objections before the respondent, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On the petitioner producing the relevant documents before the respondent and on his raising his objections, within the period specified by this Court, the respondent shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders thereon, on merits and in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner, within four weeks, thereafter. The writ petition stands ordered accordingly. No costs. Connected M.P.No.1 of 2011 is closed.