w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



M/s. Saravana International, Rep. by its Proprietor C.R. Devanathan, Panruti v/s The Assistant Commissioner (ST), Panruti


Company & Directors' Information:- C.R & D CO. (INDIA) PVT. LTD. [Under Liquidation] CIN = U36991WB1979PTC031882

    Writ Appeal No. 4085 of 2019 & C.M.P. No. 25533 of 2019

    Decided On, 12 December 2019

    At, High Court of Judicature at Madras

    By, THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. SURESH KUMAR

    For the Appellant: V. Sundareswaran, Advocate. For the Respondent: Mohammed Shafiq, Special Government Pleader.



Judgment Text


(Prayer: Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order of this Court dated 05.07.2019 passed in W.P.No.12370 of 2019.)

Dr. Vineet Kothari, J.

1. The appellant Assessee, aggrieved by the order of the learned Single Judge dated 05.07.2019 dismissing the writ petition filed by the Assessee on the ground of availability of alternative remedy, has filed this present intra Court appeal.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant Assessee Mr.V.Sundareswaran submitted that the Assessee, for the assessment period 2016-17 could not furnish the audit report as required by the newly inserted provisions in the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as 'TNVAT Act') in Section 63A of the Act in prescribed Form No.'WW' for the said assessment period and for which reason, the assessing authority viz., the Assistant Commissioner, Panruti Town, passed the impugned 'best judgment assessment order' dated 01.02.2018, enhancing the taxable turnover by 50% and imposed additional tax at 14.5% thereon. He submitted that besides imposing the tax on such enhanced turnover, the assessing authority in the order dated 04.06.2018, had also imposed the prescribed penalty under the said provisions of 63A(2) of the TNVAT Act, 2006 to the extent of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) for not filing of said Audit Report which the Assessee duly paid after the assessment order was passed by the assessing authority.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant Assessee further submitted that being aggrieved by the said 'best judgment assessment' by which the assessing authority arbitrarily enhanced the taxable turnover by 50% without any rhyme or reason, the assessee preferred the present Writ Petition before the learned Single Judge, who has however dismissed the Writ Petition on the ground of availability of alternative remedyby way of departmental appeal to the assessee. He relied upon the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of "M/s.Nithra Furniture -vs- Assistant Commissioner (CT)" decided in W.A.Nos.1148 and 1149 of 2015 dated 11.08.2015, in which the delayed filing of prescribed Audit Report in Form 'WW' was condoned by the Division Bench of this Court and the assessing authority was directed to pass a revised assessment order in that case. He therefore submitted that even though the power of the 'best judgment assessment' prescribed under Section 22(4) of the Act could be invoked by the assessing authority in such a case, but that did not empower him to pass an arbitrary and high pitched assessment order in the case of the assessee, simply enhancing the taxable turnover by 50% only for the reason of not filing the Audit Report. This he submits, amounts to double jeopardy, enhanced tax liability and penalty for the same violation.

4. Learned counsel for the Revenue Mr.Mohammed Shafiq however supported the impugned order of the learned Single Judge as well as the impugned order passed by the learned assessing authority and he urged that, since the power to pass 'best judgment assessment' could be invoked for the reason of not filing the Audit Report as per the provisions of Section 63A of the TNVAT Act, 2006, therefore, the impugned assessment order could not be assailed directly by way of filing a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. He further submitted that the availability of alternative remedy to the assessee under the Act was very much prescribed in law and therefore the order passed by the learned Single Judge is unassailable. He sought to distinguish the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court relied upon by the learned counsel for the appellant on the ground that in that case atleast the defect of filing of the audit report was cured by the assessee by later on filing of the same, upon which the Court directed the assessing authority to pass the revised assessment order.

5. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that the present Writ Appeal is an exceptional case and deserves to be allowed, not because the assessing authority could not invoke his powers under Section 22(4) of the Act for the reason of not filing of the audit report, but because of the manner in which the 'best judgment assessment' has been passed by the assessing authority on 04.06.2018 for the assessment period 2016-17. The provisions of Section 63A of the TNVAT Act are quoted below for ready reference.

"63-A. Accounts to be audited in certain cases.—(1) Every registered dealer whose total turnover including zero-rate sale and sale in the course of inter-State trade or commerce as specified in Section 3 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (Central Act 74 of 1956) in a year, exceeds one crore rupees, shall get his accounts in respect of that year, audited by an Accountant and submit a report of such audit in the prescribed Form, duly signed and verified by the Accountant, to the assessing authority, within such period as may be prescribed.

Explanation.—For the purpose of this section “Accountant” means, a chartered accountant as defined in the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949 (Central Act 38 of 1949) or a cost accountant as defined in the Cost and Works Accountants Act, 1959 (Central Act 23 of 1959). (2) If such registered dealer fails to get his accounts audited and submit a report of such audit within the prescribed period, as required in sub-section (1), the assessing authority may, after giving a reasonable opportunity of being heard, direct such registered dealer to pay by way of penalty of such of rupees ten thousand, in addition to any tax payable, in respect of the said period:

Provided that, this section shall not apply to the departments of Central and State Governments, local authorities, the railway administration as defined under the Railways Act, 1989 (Central Act 24 of 1989), the Tamil Nadu State Road Transport Corporations and similar such registered dealers, as way be notified by the Government."

6. The consequence of not getting his accounts audited even though his turnover is over Rupees One Crore and not submitting the audit report with the return or turnover is provided under explanation (2) to Section 63A itself viz., imposition of penalty of Rs.10,000/-, that too after giving a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee concerned. Firstly, we find that no separate opportunity of hearing also was given by the assessing authority before passing the order imposing for penalty of Rs.10,000/- in the impugned assessment order dated 04.06.2018. Be that as it may. Since the assessee has paid the said amount of penalty to the assessing authority vide communication dated 29.03.2019 along with a demand draft, which is placed on record, we are not inclined to quash the penalty on the said ground.

7. But our judicial conscience is shocked at the manner in which the 'Best Judgment Assessment' order was passed by the assessing authority. No enquiry, material or reasons have been indicated in the impugned assessment order dated 04.06.2018 to make such a huge addition to the extent of 50% of the declared turnover and the only averment made in the impugned assessment order is that, since the dealer has not filed the Audit Report in the prescribed Form 'WW', hence an addition of 50% has been added in the declared turnover. This consequence is not provided either in the provisions of Section 22(4) of the Act, which permits the authority to invoke his 'best judgment assessment' powers, nor in Section 63A of the Act, which prescribes for consequence of imposition of penalty of Rs.10,000/- in case such Audit Report is not furnished by the dealer to the assessing authority.

8. The 'Best Judgment Assessment' power given to the assessing authroity does not empower such assessing authority to pass 'Worst Judgment Assessment'. Though no strict yardstick can be prescribed either in Rules or otherwise, as to what will be the 'Best Judgment Assessment' in the facts and circumstances of the case, but such assessment orders when passed by the assessing authority has to reflect a due application of mind by the assessing authority to the relevant facts of the case. Without any material on record, such arbitrary additions to the declared turnover by the Assessee is not the intent and purport of Section 22(4) of the Act, which empowers the authority, which has been quoted by the assessing authority in the impugned assessment order, to pass any order as he thinks fit. Therefore in our opinion, passing such 'best judgment assessment' making 50% enhancement of the declared turnover only for the reason that the assessee did not file the audit report, for which admittedly he suffered the penalty as prescribed by law, was not permissible.

9. We are conscious that the learned Single Judge has merely relegated the petitioner / appellant to the alternative remedy available to the assessee under the provisions of the Act itself, but as the settled legal position is that the existence and availability of the alternative remedy to an aggrieved assessee, and more so in the tax laws, is a rule, a discretion of the High Court and not a bar of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Depending upon the peculiarity of the facts of the case arising before the Court, the Court may either choose to interfere in the assessment orders or otherwise may decline to do so.

10. Since in the present case, we found that the yardstick adopted by the learned assessing authority was shockingly arbitrary, we have chosen to interfere in the present case. However, we make it clear that it is not a general proposition of law that we are laying down. We are also not saying that for the reason of not furnishing of the audit report as required by Section 63A of the Act, the assessing authority could not have invoked the 'best judgment a

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

ssessment' powers under Section 22(4) of the Act. But, since we have found that the assessment order itself is without any cogent reasons and making an addition to an arbitrary extent of 50% of the declared turnover, without any other adverse material against the assessee, we are constrained to invoke our extraordinary writ jurisdiction in the present case under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and strike down the impugned 'best judgment assessment' order passed by the learned assessing authority on 04.06.2018. 11. The Writ petition is accordingly allowed and setting aside the order of learned Single Judge as well as the impugned assessment order dated 04.06.2018. We remit the matter back to the learned assessing authority to pass fresh assessment order after giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee, within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 12. With the above observations, the present Writ Appeal is allowed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
O R







Judgements of Similar Parties

01-07-2020 State of Kerala, Represented by Secretary to Government, Department of General Education, Government Secretariat, Thiruvananthapuram & Others Versus C.R. Vinod Kumar High Court of Kerala
20-05-2020 Muhammed Koya & Others Versus State of Kerala, Rep. by The Deputy Superintendent of Police, CBCID, CFS, Ernakulam, (Cr.No. 269 of 1998 of Pala Police, Station), Through The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam & Another High Court of Kerala
18-03-2020 J. Fransis Xavier Versus State, Rep. by Inspector of Police, All women police station (East), Coimbatore (Cr.No.165/2007) High Court of Judicature at Madras
09-03-2020 C. Selvakumar & Others Versus State, Rep. by The Assistant Commissioner of Police, All Women Police Station (Centre), Coimbatore. (Cr.No.38 of 2007) High Court of Judicature at Madras
02-03-2020 Gopalan & Others Versus State of Kerala Represented by C.I. of Police, Pudukkad (Cr. No. 311/1996) & Others High Court of Kerala
11-02-2020 Ircon International Limited Versus C.R. Sons Builders & Development Pvt. Ltd. & Another High Court of Delhi
23-10-2019 The Commissioner Kancheepuram Municipality Kancheepuram Versus C.R. Baskaran High Court of Judicature at Madras
30-07-2019 Manish Khandelwal & Others Versus The State of Maharashtra (through Economic offences Wing, Unit – III CR No. 68/2010) & Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
05-07-2019 M/s. Saravana International, Rep. by its Proprietor, C.R. Devanathan, Panruti Versus The Assistant Commissioner (ST), Panruti High Court of Judicature at Madras
04-04-2019 C.R. Ajayakumar, Senior Clerk, Kizhuvilam Service Co-Operative Bank Limited, No. 2405, Thiruvananthapuram & Others Versus The Registrar of Co-Operative Societies, Thiruvananthapuram & Others High Court of Kerala
25-02-2019 Victim In Cr.297/17 of Nedumbassery Police Station Versus State of Kerala High Court of Kerala
12-12-2018 V.K. Lakshmi Versus C.R. Sivanandam & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
31-10-2018 C.R. Ramachary & Another Versus Indian Overseas Bank, Rep. by its Chief Manager, Head Office, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
11-10-2018 C.R. Rajan, Chennai Versus Ito Non Corporate Ward 6(1) Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Chennai
07-09-2018 M/s. Muthiah Fire Works, Represented by its Partner K. Muthu Kumar Versus The Assistant Commissioner (CR)-II, Sivakasi Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
05-09-2018 C.R. Kariyappa Versus State of Karnataka Supreme Court of India
13-08-2018 Assistant Commissioner, Muzarai Department, Dr. Ambedkar Veedi, Bengaluru Versus C.R. Shamanna & Others High Court of Karnataka
16-07-2018 K.R. Subramanian Versus C.R. Susila High Court of Judicature at Madras
13-07-2018 Ravi, Kannur Versus State of Kerala (Sho, Adhur Police Station Cr.No.60/2003) High Court of Kerala
28-06-2018 National Insurance Co. Ltd. (CR)-I Versus Subhashish Manna & Another High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
23-06-2018 C.R. Muthukumar Versus R. Ranganayagi High Court of Judicature at Madras
06-06-2018 The Commercial Tax Officer-I, Wadakkancherry & Another Versus C.R. Varghese, M/s. Global Rubber Products, Kumblangad, Thrissur District High Court of Kerala
17-05-2018 M/s. Geeyam Constructions, Represented by its Managing Partner, C.R. Chandrasekaran Versus The Inspector General of Registration, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
09-05-2018 Dr. C.R. Ramadas Versus N.R. Chandran Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Thiruvananthapuram
03-05-2018 M/s. Sodexo Food Solutions India Pvt Ltd., Rep by its Authorised signatory C.R. Ravichandran - Manager-HR Versus The Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, Employees Provident Fund Organisation, Chennai High Court of Judicature at Madras
28-03-2018 K.S. Varadarajan & Others Versus State Represented by Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance & Anti Corruption, City I Detachment, Cuddalore V. & A.C. Cr.No.46/AC/90 High Court of Judicature at Madras
23-02-2018 M/s. Doshi Developers and Builders Pvt. Ltd., Rep. by its Director, Harshad V. Doshi, Chennai & Another Versus C.R. Vasanthi & Others Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
08-02-2018 C.R. Sivanandham (deceased) & Others Versus V.K. Ramprasad & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
31-01-2018 In re [Reference made under Section 395, Cr.P.C. by the learned II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Trichirapalli in S.C. No.44 of 2014 on its file]\ High Court of Judicature at Madras
30-01-2018 Sivakumar @ Ramesh Versus State rep. by, The Inspector of Police All Women Police Station Gobichettipalayam, Erode District. [Cr.No.6/2016] High Court of Judicature at Madras
07-11-2017 Vodafone Digilink Limited Versus CIT (TDS), (Formerly Vodafone Essar C.R. Building, Digilink Limited) Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Delhi
16-10-2017 C.R. Mahesh Versus R. Ramachandan High Court of Kerala
06-10-2017 Workmen of MRF Plant, Rep. by its MRF Employees Union, Through its General Secretary C.R. Prabakaran Versus Simon A. Panikar, General Manager, Rep. MRF Limited, Authorised Signatory Thiruvottiyur Plant, Chennai High Court of Judicature at Madras
24-08-2017 C.R. Sabeena rep. by Power To Attorney Holder, C. Ramakrishnan Versus The Chief Town Planner, Urban & Rural Planning Department & Others High Court of Kerala
18-08-2017 C.R. Yadav & Sons, HUF Versus Manchanda & Manchanda Builders Pvt. Ltd. & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
12-07-2017 Chettiyappan & Others Versus State, rep. By Inspector of Police Eriyur, Dharmapuri (Cr. No. 156/2006) Eriyur Police Station High Court of Judicature at Madras
22-06-2017 C.R. Vasantha Kumari Versus The Executive Officer, Veerapandi Town Panchayat, Coimbatore & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
16-06-2017 The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, C.R. Building, Navanagar, Hubballi & Another Versus The Totagars Co-Operative Sale Society, Sirsi High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench At Dharwad
09-06-2017 M. Kandasamy Mudaliar (died) & Others Versus The State by Inspector of Police, Kadambattur Police Station, Tiruvallur (Cr.No.178/2005) High Court of Judicature at Madras
09-06-2017 Pasupathi Versus State represented by the Inspector of Police, Dindigul District, Cr. No.38 of 2011 & Another Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
07-06-2017 C.R. Palanidoss @ Palani Balasubramaniam & Others Versus Sri Muthukumaraswamy Devasthanam rep. by its Trustees & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
01-06-2017 State Bank of India, Coimbatore Versus runa Exports, represented by partner, C.R. Jaikumar & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
01-06-2017 Arumugam Versus State rep by The Station House Officer, Karaikal, Puducherry, Cr.No.165 of 2009 High Court of Judicature at Madras
03-05-2017 C.R. Tandya Versus State of Chhattisgarh High Court of Chhattisgarh
11-04-2017 The Principal Ordinance Factory Versus C.R. Nathan High Court of Madhya Pradesh
03-04-2017 C.R. Chithra Versus State of Kerala, Represented by Principal Secretary & Others High Court of Kerala
31-03-2017 C.R. Yadav, HCS (Retd.) Versus State of Haryana & Others Supreme Court of India
27-03-2017 C.R. Radhakrishnan Versus State of Kerala & Others Supreme Court of India
01-02-2017 C.R. Suresh Versus Chief Electoral Officer of the Chief Electoral Officer & Others High Court of Karnataka
10-01-2017 C.R. Rajendra Babu Versus State by CBI/BS & FC, Bangalore High Court of Karnataka
04-01-2017 C.R. Rangaswamynaika Versus K.M. Ramaswamy & Others High Court of Karnataka
15-12-2016 C.R. Tamilvanan Versus The Commissioner of Police Salem & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
29-11-2016 M/s. Shiv Shakti Flour Mills (P) Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Income Tax, Dibrugarh, C.R. Building, Dibrugarh High Court of Gauhati
14-11-2016 S. Raja Versus The State rep.by the Inspector of Police, C2 Traffic Investigation (Cr.No. 114/C2/2006) High Court of Judicature at Madras
09-11-2016 C.R. Manoharan, (Owner, Poornasree Travels) Versus Labour Court, Ernakulam & Another High Court of Kerala
26-07-2016 Sudhanshu Kumar Versus Union of India, through, Regional Director (CR), Allahabad & Others High Court of Judicature at Patna
12-07-2016 M/s. ITC Limited Versus Commissioner of Central Excise C.R. Bangalore-II Commissionerate Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Bangalore
09-06-2016 C.R. Binu Versus Union of India, represented by the Secretary to the Government, Department of Posts & Others Central Administrative Tribunal Ernakulam Bench
21-01-2016 A.S. Hansraj Versus C.R. Balasubramanian High Court of Judicature at Madras
13-01-2016 Commissioner, Mysore Urban Development Authority, Karnataka Versus C.R. Ananda Rao National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
21-12-2015 M.V. Krishnamurthy & Others Versus C.R. Satyanarayanan & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
14-12-2015 The Commissioner of Income Tax, C.R. Building & Another Versus Karnataka Vikas Grameen Bank High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench At Dharwad
16-10-2015 The Commissioner of Income Tax, C.R. Building, Queens Road, Bangalore & Others Versus KBD Sugars & Distilleries Ltd. High Court of Karnataka
17-09-2015 Committee for C.R. of C.A.P. & Others Versus State of Arunachal Pradesh & Others Supreme Court of India
04-09-2015 C.R. Muthusamy Versus K.K. Muthusamy High Court of Judicature at Madras
26-08-2015 Amuthavalli & Another Versus Arulmighu Anjaneyasamy Temple, Salem rep. by its Managing Trustee C.D. Gopal rep by his Power of Attorney Agent C.R. Dharmalingam High Court of Judicature at Madras
21-08-2015 C.R. Asha Devi Versus Union of India, Rep. by the Secretary to the Government of India, New Delhi & Others Central Administrative Tribunal Ernakulam Bench
13-07-2015 The Commissioner of Income Tax, C.R. Bulding, Bangalore & Another Versus B.S. Shanthakumari High Court of Karnataka
29-06-2015 C.R. Ajayakumar, Senior Clerk, Kizhuvilam Service Co-Operative Bank Limited Thiruvananthapuram Versus State of Kerala, represented by The Secretary To Government, Department of Co-Operation, Thiruvananthapuram & Others High Court of Kerala
15-06-2015 G. Srinivasan & Another Versus C.R. Rajamma & Others High Court of Karnataka
23-04-2015 C.R. Murugan & Another Versus The Secretary to Government, State of Tamilnadu Transport Department, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
02-03-2015 C.R. Sasidharan Versus The Deputy Excise Commissioner, Alappuzha & Others High Court of Kerala
22-01-2015 Hindalco Industries Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax Cochin-CCE, C.R. Building, Cochin, Kerala Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Bangalore
25-11-2014 C.R. Shankar Versus N. Alagappan High Court of Judicature at Madras
07-11-2014 C.R. Umapathy & Others Versus D. Sathyanarayana Chettiar & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
12-09-2014 M.V. Leelavathi & Another Versus C.R. Swamy 63 @ C.R. Kumara Swamy & Another High Court of Karnataka
20-08-2014 Y. Kameswara Rao Versus Union of India, rep., by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-II, C.R. Building, Vijayawada & Others Central Administrative Tribunal Hyderabad Bench
06-08-2014 C.R. Saravanan & Another Versus The State Of Tamilnadu Rep. Through Its Secretary & Others Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
09-07-2014 CR Retail Malls (India) Limited Versus Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, Maharashtra State & Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
04-07-2014 C.R. Gandhi & Others Versus The Inspector General of Registration & Others Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
20-06-2014 C.R. Prasad @ C. Rajendra Prasad Versus N. Vijayalakshmi High Court of Judicature at Madras
11-06-2014 C.R. Boopathy & Another Versus V.S. Singaravelu High Court of Judicature at Madras
14-05-2014 Union of India Thru' D.R.M., C.R., Jhansi Versus Maszood Ali High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
07-05-2014 C.R. Neelakandan and Another Versus Union of India and Others Supreme Court of India
22-04-2014 Ford Motor Company & Another Versus C.R. Borman & Another High Court of Delhi
21-03-2014 C.R. Damodara Reddy Versus Central Bank of India, rep. by its Chairman and Managing Director & Others High Court of Andhra Pradesh
29-10-2013 Mrs. C.R. Bhanumathi & Others Versus K.T. Shrishyala & Another High Court of Karnataka
02-08-2013 A.L. Govindarajulu (Died) & Others Versus M/s. C.R. Jaganathan & Brothers Coimbatore & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
17-06-2013 Indian Overseas Bank, rep. by the Chairman & Managing Director & Others Versus C.R. Chandrasekaran& Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
17-06-2013 K.K. Karthikeyan & Others Versus C.R. Deivasigamony Chetty & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
07-05-2013 C.R. Rajesh Nair Versus Securities and Exchange Board of India SEBI Bhavan SEBI Securities Exchange Board of India Securities Appellate Tribunal
18-04-2013 C.R. Ramanath & Others Versus The District Collector, Krishnagiri District, Krishnagiri & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
03-04-2013 C.R. Suresh Kumar & Others Versus State of Kerala Represented by its Secretary, Transport Department & Others High Court of Kerala
21-03-2013 S. Antony Jayaraj Versus State by The Inspector of Police, Coimbatore. Cr.No.6 of 2005 High Court of Judicature at Madras
27-02-2013 Principal, C.R. College of Pharmacy, Karnataka & Another Versus Lalit Mohan & Another Himachal Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Shimla
07-12-2012 The Branch Manager, LIC of India & Others Versus C.R. Paniker Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Thiruvananthapuram
06-11-2012 The Commissioner of Income-Tax Central Circle C.R. Building & Another Versus M/s. Indo Nissin Foods Ltd. Ranka Chambers High Court of Karnataka
31-10-2012 C.R. Muraleedharan Nair Versus Union of India & Others Central Administrative Tribunal Ernakulam Bench
31-10-2012 C.R. Muraleedharan Nair Versus Union of India & Others Central Administrative Tribunal Ernakulam Bench
17-09-2012 C.R. Devassy, Proprietor Versus P.R. Joy, Panengadan House Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Thiruvananthapuram