S. Sivakumar Vs. The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer (Madras High Court)
Heard Mr.Adithya Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.S.Kanmani Annamalai, learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents. With the consent on either side, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal.
2. The petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging a compounding order passed in the year 2015. The petitioner was transporting cigarettes and the goods were detained by issuing detention notice dated 16.05.2015. This was challenged by the petitioner in W.P.No. 14954 of 2015 and the writ petition was disposed of by order dated 21.05.2015, directing the respondent to release the goods on payment of one-time tax. Subsequently, an order came to be passed on 31.08.2015 detaining the goods. If the petitioner was aggrieved by such detention, what he should have done is to file revision as against the detention order. Since the goods were released, the petitioner abandoned the proceedings and when steps for recovery were initiated by the respondent by issuing notice dated 10.11.2017, the petitioner has rushed to this Court.
3. Considering the fact that the petitioner has a revisional remedy as against the order dated 31.08.2015, this Court is inclined to grant one indulgence to the petitioner to pursue the revisional remedy within a time frame, failing which the respondent can take action for recovery including prosecution.
4. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the petitioner to file a revision petition before the concerned revisional authority within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If the petitioner does not file revision petition before the revisional authority, then the respondent shall immediately take action for recovery and prosecute the petitioner under the provisions of the TNVAT Act. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
