M/s Sri Vaishnavi Spice v. The Commercial Tax Officer
Court: High Court for State of Telangana
Bench: M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO,T.AMARNATH GOUD
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court for State of Telangana judgment dated 2020-12-17. M/s Sri Vaishnavi Spice v. The Commercial Tax Officer. Read the judgment and case details on...
Judgment text
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original J urisdiction) THURSDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF DECEIVBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M. S,RAMACHANDRA RAO AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. AMARNATH GOUD wRtT PET|T|ON NO. 22433 0F 2020 Between: M/s. Sri Vaishnavi Spice, 1/120, Sy. No. 668/1a, [Manikbhandar, Nizamabad - 503 001, Telangana. Represented by its Proprietor, Mr. Ramesh Pandey, S/o. Mr. Shyam Sundar Pande' ... PETrroNER AND 1. The Commercial Tax Officer, Bhodan Circle, Nizamabad Division, TNGO's Building, Rakasipet, Bodhan, Nizamabad - 503 185, Telangana. 2. The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, State of Telangana, Commercial Taxes Complex, lV. J. Road, Opposite Gandhi Bhavan, Nampally, Hyderabad - 500 001 . 3. The State of Telangana, Represented by its Principal Secretary (Revenue) (CT), Telangana Secretariat, Hyderabad - 500 O22. ..
,RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction one in the nature of l\,4andamus declaring the Assessment Order in A. A. O. No. : 38100, dated 27. 03. 2020, passed by the 1st Respondent, for the period 20'l 5 - 16, under the provisions of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, as void, arbitrary, highhanded, mechanical, without jurisdiction and bereft of any valid reasons, apart from being illegal, violative of principles of natural justice and Articles 14 & 265 of the Constitution of lndia; and consequently set aside the same. lA NO: 1 OF 2020 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings, including any recovery, pursuant to the Assessment Order in A. A. O. No. : 38100, dated 27. 03.
2020, passed by the 1't Respondent, for the period '1956, 2015 - 16, under the provisions of the Central Sales Tax Act, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI J. V. RAO Counsel for the Respondents: SRI M. GOVIND REDDY, SPECIAL COUNSEL FOR COMMERCIAL TAXES The Court made the following: ORDER HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE M. S. RAMACHANDRA RAO AND (; HOn'O URAB l-E SIll J t- STICE, 1'. A MA RNAT tl O UD WRIT PETITION No. 22433 of 2420 ORDEIT: (l)cr Hon'hlc Sli . irrsticc \1. S. RanrLchandta Rao) ln this Writ Petition, petitioner assails the Assessr. nent Order AO No. 38l00 dr. 27-03-2020 passed by l'' respondent lbr the tax period 2015- l6 under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (tbr shon 'the Act'). 7. Petitioner contends that though impugned assessment order refers to issuance of notices dt. 16-1 1-2019 and 06-03-2020, petitioner did not receive any of these notices and no personal hearing was also afforded to the petitioner l. Sri M.
Govind Reddy, learned Special Counsel for Commercial Taxes appearing lbr responclcrrts cloes not dispute the fact that prior shou eausc notice ol other noticcs \\'crc not sen ed on petitioner and that no pclsonal hearing *,as alTorded to thc petitioner. 4. We are of the opinion that norr-service of pre-assesslnent show cause notice and other notices and denial of personal hearing to the petitioner has caused serious prejudice to the petitioner 5. In this view of the matter. the Writ Petition is allowed: the impugned Assessment Order No. 38100 dt.
27-03-2020 passecl by respondent is set aside; the matter is remitted back to the l" r'espondent fbr liesh consideration; the l't respondenl is dil'ected to servc show cause notice on petitioner indicating the proposed turnover to be taxed and also rhe rax proposed in accordance with Rule 64(l)(b) 'I'elangana of the VAT Rules, 2005; petitioner is granted six (06) weeks fiorn the date olreceipt olthe shorv cause notice to file objections along with supporti,g material; a personal hearing shall be provided to the petitioner by 1'' respondent; and then a rcasoned order shall be passecl by I'' respondent in accordance with law and communicated to tltc petitioner. No costs. 6. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed. SD/. V. SUDHA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Commercial Tax Officer, Bhodan Circle, Nizamabad Division, TNGO's Building, Rakasipet, Bodhan, Nizamabad - 503 185, Telangana. 2.
The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, State of Telangana, Commercial Taxes Complex, lt4. J. Road, Opposite Gandhi Bhavan, Nampally, Hyderabad - 500 001. 3. The Principal Secretary (Revenue) (CT), State of Telangana, Telangana Secretariat, Hyderabad - 500 022. 4. One CC to Sri J. V. Rao, Advocate IOPUC] 5. Two CCs to Sri N/. Govind Reddy, Special Counsel for Commercial Taxes, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT] 6. Two CD Copies. N/P . \. j- I HIGH COURT DATED:1711212020 1 H e TA i4: o o 80DEC 2m a -L -: * * P/,. I ORDER WP. No. 22433 of 2020 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS g * I
Source: High Court for State of Telangana. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.