9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 1479X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sought for by the petitioner is to be considered and granted, then it would be in direct conflict to order passed by the respondent rejecting the representation made by the second respondent to issue Form C declaration as such request made by the second respondent has been rejected by the first respondent vide order dated 29.11.2017 and communicated to the second respondent. As long as the order remains in tact, the question of considering the prayer for an amended relief does not arise, that too, at the instance of the writ petitioner. Neither the prayer as sought for by the petitioner can be granted nor the amendment sought for can be permitted - petition dismissed. - W.P.No.1772 of 2017 & W.M.P.No.1756 of 2017 - - - Dated:- 6-12-2017 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oposing to deny the exemption granted for transit sales under Section 6(2) on the ground that the petitioner has not filed the Statutory Forms C/E1 in support of such exemption claimed. The petitioner s case is that they were informed by the second respondent that they are unable to generate online Form C Declaration on account of non-recognition of the same by the Union Territory. 4. It appears that on account of the insistence made by the petitioner for issuance of Form C Declaration, the second respondent made a representation to the 5th respondent on 09.03.2015 pointing out that they are unable to generate Form C Declaration online. Since the petitioner was unable to produce Form C Declaration, the third respondent passed assessment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orms were held to be not maintainable and the request has been rejected. 6. In the given facts and circumstances it has to be seen whether the writ petition is maintainable and whether the petitioner should be permitted to prosecute the writ petition for the proposed amended relief. In support of the contentions raised by the writ petitioner with regard to maintainability of the writ petition, reliance was placed on the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in M/s.Amurtham Petroleum Agency Vs. The Additional Deputy Commercial Tax. Puducherry reported in 2016-VIL-254-Madras, wherein it is pointed out that in the said batch of cases, one of the writ petitioners was the Indian Oil Corporation Limited, who were entitled to cla ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e during the pendency of the writ petition. Assuming if the amendment to the prayer as sought for by the petitioner is to be considered and granted, then it would be in direct conflict to order passed by the respondent rejecting the representation made by the second respondent to issue Form C declaration as such request made by the second respondent has been rejected by the first respondent vide order dated 29.11.2017 and communicated to the second respondent. As long as the order remains in tact, the question of considering the prayer for an amended relief does not arise, that too, at the instance of the writ petitioner. 8. Thus, for the above reasons, neither the prayer as sought for by the petitioner can be granted nor the amendment s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
