Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 493 (MAD)

Haji Sattar and Sons Represented by its Partner v. The Assistant Commissioner (Commercial Tax)

2012-02-01

M.JAICHANDREN

body2012
Judgment :- 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent. 2. At this stage of the hearing of the writ petition, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had submitted that it would suffice, if the impugned order of the respondent, dated 07.12.2011, in respect of the assessment year 2008-2009, is set aside and if the petitioner is permitted to raise its objections claiming exemption of purchase tax, for the goods in question, along with the relevant imported documents, and if the respondent is directed to consider the same and pass orders thereon, within a stipulated time. 3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent has no objection for this Court passing such an order. 4. In view of the above, the impugned order of the respondent, dated 07.12.2011, is set aside. The petitioner is directed to file his objections to the pre-revision notice, dated 04.01.2011, before the respondent, claiming exemption of purchase tax, for the goods in question, along with the relevant imported documents, within a period of fifteen days from today. On receipt of the objections to be filed by the petitioner, along with the related documents, the respondent shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders thereon, within a period of three weeks thereafter. This Writ Petition is ordered accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.