Madras High Court Weekly Roundup: July 4 - July 10, 2022

A weekly round-up of important cases from Madras High Court and its subordinate courts. Citations: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 281 To 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 293 NOMINAL INDEX Sankar v. State, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 281 Dr G. Selvarajan v. Dr M.S Santhosh and Ors, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 282 M/s.Anantham Retail Private Limited Versus State Tax Officer, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 283 G.Francis Raja v. State and another, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 284 M/s.KTV Health Foods Pvt Ltd v. Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 285 The Assistant Commissioner of Customs - Imports, Custom House Versus M/s. Mahadev Enterprises, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 286 Sridhar Versus The Superintendent of GST, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 287 S Krishnamurthy v. Dr Manivasan, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 288 V.Krishnamurthy v. The State of TN and others, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 289 The State of Tamil Nadu and others v. R Chitradevi and others, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 290 C.Soman v. The Secretary, HR&CE and others, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 291 Charu K. Bagadia Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-23(2), Mumbai, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 292 B.Ramprakash v. The Government of Tamil Nadu, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 293 REPORTS 1. Rigor Of S.33(5) Of POCSO Act Gets Diluted Once Victim Attains Majority: Madras High Court Reiterates Case Title: Sankar v. State Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 281 Observing that the accused must be given an opportunity to place his defence, the Madras High court recently allowed a POCSO accused's plea for recall of the victim for cross examination. Justice V.Sivagnanam explained that Section 33 (5) of the Act was introduced only to ensure that the child should not be repeatedly called to the Court for examining as it would affect the mind of the child. In the present case, the victim was no longer a child and had attained majority. Hence, the victim could be called for cross examination to give a last chance to the accused to give his defence. 2. Madras High Court Confirms Order Of CB-CID Enquiry Into Medical Admission Scams Case Title: Dr G. Selvarajan v. Dr M.S Santhosh and Ors Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 282 The Madras High Court on Monday confirmed the order of the single judge directing a CB-CID enquiry in a matter relating to series of scams relating to admissions to the medical courses in state. The court passed the order on an appeal filed by Dr G. Selvarajan, former secretary of the Selection Committee, Directorate of Medical Education, seeking a stay of a single bench order whereby the court had found Selvarajan along with others guilty of not conducting the mop-up counselling for the management seats. The bench of Chief Justice Munishwar Nath Bhandari and Justice N Mala observed that the proceedings against the appellant could continue and that the court could only interfere with respect to the stoppage of pensionary benefits to the appellant subject to the outcome of the enquiry proceedings. The disciplinary proceedings were to be completed within a period of six months and no extention of time would be granted. The court also agreed with the direction of the single judge to pay Rs. 4 lakh each to the writ petitioners as the students were dragged to the litigation only for the reason that the writ appellant did not conduct mop-counselling. 3. No Demand Of GST, Interest And Penalty Can Be Made In Form DRC-01A Without Issuance of Section 74(1) Notice: Madras High Court Case Title: M/s.Anantham Retail Private Limited Versus State Tax Officer Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 283 While quashing the assessment order, the Madras High Court held that a demand for GST, interest, and penalty on Form DRC-01A cannot be made without the issuance of a notice under Section 74(1) of the CGST Act. The single bench of Justice M.Nirmal Kumar has observed that the department/respondent has not followed the procedure. After the issuance of notice on Form DRC-01A, the department issued Form GST DRC-01A. If the petitioner has any objections and has not paid the tax as determined, a show cause notice must be issued under Section 74(1) of the TNGST Act. After receiving objections and giving an opportunity of personal hearing, the assessment order ought to have been finalised. 4. "DSP's Conduct Unknown To Law, Further Investigation Is Tainted": Madras High Court Quashes Forgery & Cheating Case Case Title: G.Francis Raja v. State and another Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 284 The Madras High Court recently allowed an appeal for quashing criminal proceedings against one Francis Raja accused of forgery and cheating. The court made the order after raising suspicion about the manner in which the further investigation was conducted, especially by the Deputy Superintendent of Police. Justice Nirmal Kumar observed a lot of defects in the manner in which further investigation was carried out. The court observed that the Trial Court ought to...

Madras High Court Weekly Roundup: July 4 - July 10, 2022

Upasana Sajeev

Tags