Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
M/S. Kiran Garments, vs The Commercial Tax Officer, on 11 September, 2024
Author: R Raghunandan Rao
Bench: R Raghunandan Rao
APHC010406172017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3488]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N
WRIT PETITION NO: 12855/2017
Between:
M/s. Kiran Garments, ...PETITIONER
AND
The Commercial Tax Officer and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. S RAJAGOPALAN
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX (AP)
2. S SURI BABU
The Court made the following order:(per Hon'ble Sri Justice R Raghunandan Rao)
The petitioner is a dealer registered under the Andhra Pradesh Value
Added Tax Act, 2005, and carried on business in readymade garments. The
premises of the petitioner had been inspected and an audit was also
conducted. On the basis of the said audit, show cause notice is said to have
been issued to the petitioner and thereafter, an assessment order, dated
19.01.2017, has been passed by the 1st respondent-Commercial Tax Officer.
RRR, J & HN, J
2. The petitioner, being aggrieved by the said assessment order,
has filed the present Writ Petition for quashing the said assessment order and
for directing the respondents to re-hear the matter.
3. The case of the petitioner is that, despite visiting the office of the
1st respondent from the date on which the inspection had been carried out on
22.12.2016, no show cause notice of any nature was issued to the petitioner
nor was the petitioner given an opportunity to defend herself against the said
show cause notice. The petitioner also contends that the impugned
assessment order, dated 19.01.2017, has not been served on her and she is
unable to take any further steps against the said assessment order.
4. The respondents have not chosen to file any counter affidavit. In
the normal circumstances, the allegations in the affidavit would have been
accepted and an order would have been passed on that basis. However,
when the Writ Petition was filed, this Court had summoned the record from the
1st respondent. After examining the record, this Court, on 25.04.2017, had
recorded that the file contains an acknowledgment by the husband of the
proprietrix on both the show cause notice as well as the order of assessment.
5. In that view of the matter, the allegation of the petitioner that
notices and order of assessment were not served cannot be accepted.
However, to obviate any further complaint of violation of principles of natural
justice, the present Writ Petition is disposed of, leaving it open to the petitioner
RRR, J & HN, J
to file an appeal against the order of assessment by treating the date of
service of the said order to be the date of this judgment. This order is passed
in the peculiar facts of this case and shall not be treated as a precedent.
There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, interlocutory applications pending, if any shall stand
closed.
_______________________
R RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J
______________
HARINATH.N, J
MJA
RRR, J & HN, J
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N
WRIT PETITION NO: 12855 of 2017
(per Hon'ble Sri Justice R Raghunandan Rao)
11.09.2024
MJA
