IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATE: 18.01.2010 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN Writ Petition No.1152 of 2006 & W.P.M.P.Nos. 1280 & 1281 of 2008 M/s.Hatsun Foods Company 114, Angadu Road, Nallur Village, Chennai- 600 067 .. Petitioner. Versus 1.The State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by the Secretary, CT&RE Department,Fort St.George, Chennai 2.The Appellate Assistant Commissioner (CT)(FAC) Kancheepuram 3.The Commercial Tax Officer, Ponneri Assessment Circle, Chennai 4.The Union Territory of Pondicherry rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Pondicherry .. Respondents. Prayer: Petition filed seeking for a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the 2nd respondent in AP.222/2003, quash the order dt.05.09.2005 passed therein and further direct the 3rd respondent not to levy tax on the turnover of Rs.41,33,974/- in as much as the very same respondent has levied and collected tax @ 4% under the CST Act,1956 from the petitioner vide proceedings No.CST.636993/2000-01 dt.11.09.2002 and the very same transactions have been assessed to sales tax under the Pondicherry General sales Tax Act collected by the 4th respondent. For Petitioner : M/s.R.L.Ramani For Respondents : Mr.J.Ganesan (1 to 3) Government Pleader (T) For 4th respondent : No appearance https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ O R D E R Heard Mr.R.L.Ramani, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr.J.Ganesan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents 1 to 3. 2.At this stage of the hearing of this Writ Petition, the learned counsel for the petitioner had submitted that the order passed by the second respondent, Appellate Authority, on 05.09.2005, does not contain detailed reasons as to how the order of the third respondent is confirmed, in so far as it relates to the levy of the sales tax on the petitioner at 7% on the sum of Rs.41,33,974/-, under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act. It is also the further contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that in subsequent orders, dated 17.12.2009, the appellate authority, while dealing with similar assessments, passed detailed orders accepting the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioner herein, by giving specific reasons to assess the turnover and to levy the Sales Tax, considering it as interstate sales. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents 1 to 3 has no objection for this Court setting aside the order of the 2nd respondent, dated 05.09.2005 and to remit it back to the second respondent, to pass orders on the Appeal No.222/2003, afresh, by giving sufficient reasons. It is made clear that the remand is only in so far as it relates to the payment of sales tax at 7% on the sum of Rs.41,33,974/-, as confirmed by the appellate authority, by an order dated 05.09.2005. 4. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing for the parties concerned, the second respondent is directed to pass final orders on the Appeal No.222/2003, on merits, and in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as well as to the respondents concerned. 5. With the above directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently connected M.P.'s are closed. Sd/- Asst. Registrar //true copy// Sub Asst.Registrar arr https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ To 1.The Secretary, State of Tamil Nadu CT&RE Department,Fort St.George, Chennai 2.The Appellate Assistant Commissioner (CT)(FAC) Kancheepuram 3.The Commercial Tax Officer, Ponneri Assessment Circle, Chennai 4. The Secretary, Union Territory of Pondicherry Ministry of Finance, Pondicherry. 1 cc to Mr.K.J.Chandran, Advocate, Sr.No.2767 1 cc to Government Pleader, Sr.No.2837 Writ Petition No.1152 of 2006 SR {CO} TP/2.2.2010. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/