M/S, Siare Technologies vs The Government Of Telangana

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 195 Tel
Judgement Date : 29 January, 2021

Telangana High Court
M/S, Siare Technologies vs The Government Of Telangana on 29 January, 2021
Bench: M.S.Ramachandra Rao, T.Amarnath Goud
      HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO
                                        AND
         HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.AMARNATH GOUD

                  WRIT PETITION NO.24107 OF 2020

                                    O R D E R:

(Per Sri Justice M.S.Ramachandra Rao) The petitioner has challenged the Assessment Order A.O.No.28643 dt.13.03.2020 for the period April, 2015 to March, 2016 and the consequent demand notice dt.15.03.2020 issued by the 3rd respondent apart from the garnishee notice dt.16.11.2020 issued by the 3rd respondent to its banker.

2. The petitioner contends that it received a show-cause notice from the 3rd respondent and filed objections thereto online on 22.01.2020; that the 3rd respondent called upon the petitioner to attend personal hearing on 11.03.2020; that the petitioner could not attend the same but its Branch Manager appeared and submitted certain documents in support of its CST Returns and requested further time for submission of C-Forms relating to inter-State sales since the same had to be secured from different States and different dealers/customers; that the 3rd respondent orally informed the representative of the petitioner that the next date of hearing would be intimated, but suddenly the impugned Assessment Order passed by the 3rd respondent was received by the petitioner on 16.03.2020 without mentioning that time was sought by petitioner for submitting C-Forms for inter-State sales.

3. The petitioner contends that a garnishee notice dt.16.11.2020 was issued under Section 29 of the TVAT Act, 2005 to the petitioner's banker and the bank account of the petitioner was frozen by the bank; 2 the petitioner then gave a letter dt.03.12.2020 agreeing to pay 25% of the tax liability to unfreeze the bank account and also issued two post dated cheques dt.29.12.2020 and 20.01.2021 for Rs.5,00,000/- each intimating that the petitioner is proposing to challenge the Assessment Order and seek reassessment. The petitioner also stated that it had paid a sum of Rs.3,33,364/- without prejudice to their rights and that subsequently the 3rd respondent had revoked, through a letter dt.04.12.2020, the garnishee notice dt.16.11.2020.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner therefore prays for setting aside of the impugned assessment and remand of the matter to the 3rd respondent so that the petitioner may file the statutory 'C' Declaration Forms which the petitioner is able to secure and claim concessional rate of tax.

5. It is not in dispute that even after passing of the Assessment Order in terms of Rule 12(7) of the CST (Registration & Turnover) Rules, 1957 as interpreted by this Court in Godrej Agrovet Limited Vs. CTO, Eluru1, the 3rd respondent has power to consider 'C' Declaration Forms and if they are considered, there would be a reduction in the liability of the petitioner to pay the CST.

6. Sri M.Govind Reddy, learned Special Counsel for Commercial Taxes appearing for the respondents states that the 3rd respondent would give an opportunity to the petitioner to file the 'C' Declaration Forms which were not available prior to passing of the impugned Assessment Order and that the matter be remitted back to the 3rd respondent. 1 7 VST 703 (AP) : 41 APSTJ 92 3

7. In view of the Judgment in Godrej Agrovet Limited (1 supra), we are of the opinion that in the interests of justice the impugned Assessment Order A.O.No.28643 dt.13.03.2020 deserves to be set aside.

8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed; the impugned Assessment Order A.O.No.28643 dt.13.03.2020 passed by the 3rd respondent is set aside; the matter is remitted back to the 3rd respondent for fresh consideration; the petitioner is granted six (6) weeks time from the date of receipt of a copy of this order to file 'C' Declaration Forms if not already filed before the 3rd respondent; a personal hearing shall be afforded to the petitioner by the 3rd respondent; and then a reasoned order shall be passed by the 3rd respondent in accordance with law and communicated to the petitioner. No costs.

9. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.

____________________________ M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO, J _______________________ T.AMARNATH GOUD, J Date:29-01-2021 Svv