M/S. Madhura Meenakshi Plywood And Wood Beading vs. State Of Andhra Pradesh
Held
The Court held that the Assessment Order dated 08.02.2016 was vitiated due to the non-observance of the principles of natural justice. The reasoning was that respondent No.2 passed the order before the expiry of the 15-day period granted to the petitioner in the show cause notice to submit its explanation. This premature action deprived the petitioner of a crucial opportunity to respond, which is a fundamental aspect of natural justice. On this ground alone, the Court set aside the impugned order. The petitioner was permitted to submit their objections within two weeks of receiving the order. Respondent No.2 was then directed to pass a fresh order after considering any objections filed by the petitioner. No other issues were expressly left undecided.
Facts
The petitioner, M/s.Madhura Meenakshi Plywood and Wood beeding, filed a Writ Petition challenging the Assessment Order passed by respondent No.4, the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer-II, Narsaraopet Circle. The show cause notice, issued by respondent No.2 on January 30, 2016, alleged excess input tax credit of Rs.3,11,750/- and deficit stock variation tax of Rs.3110/-, granting 15 days for a response. However, the assessment order was passed on February 8, 2016, before the expiry of the stipulated time, thus denying the petitioner an opportunity to submit its explanation. This fact was not disputed by the respondents.
Key Issues
1. Whether the Assessment Order dated 08.02.2016, passed by respondent No.2, is illegal and arbitrary for violating the principles of natural justice, specifically the right to be heard? (Question of law) Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the assessment order was passed prematurely, without affording them the full period granted in the show cause notice to submit their explanation. This action deprived them of a fair opportunity to present their case, thus violating the principles of natural justice. Respondents' Contention: The respondents, represented by the Special Standing Counsel for Commercial Taxes, did not dispute the facts presented by the petitioner regarding the premature passing of the assessment order. No specific arguments or reliance on any provisions, circulars, or precedents were recorded for the respondents.
Sections Cited
VAT 305
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
The Hon’ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy and The Hon’ble Sri Justice T.Amarnath Goud Writ Petition No.40554 of 2017 Dt: 04-12-2017 Between: M/s.Madhura Meenakshi Plywood and Wood beeding, Narsaraopet, Srirampuram, Rep. by its Proprietor Sri M.Siva Reddy ….Petitioner and The State of Andhra Pradesh Rep. by its Prl.Secretary (Revenue) Amaravathi, Andhra Pradesh and 4 others ….Respondents
Counsel for the Petitioner:
Mr.MVJK.Kumar
Counsel for the respondents: Mr.S.Suri Babu,
Spl.SC for Commercial Taxes (AP)
The Court made the following:
CVNR, J & TA, J WP.No.40554 of 2017 Dt: 04-12-2017
2 Order: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy)
This Writ Petition is filed for issue of a Mandamus to declare the action of respondent No.4- Deputy Commercial Tax Officer-II, Narsaraopet Circle, in passing Assessment Order, dated 08-02-2016, in Form VAT 305, as illegal and arbitrary.
We have heard Mr.MVJK.Kumar, learned Counsel for the petitioner, and Mr.S.Suri Babu, learned Special Standing Counsel for Commercial Taxes (AP).
A perusal of the record shows that respondent No.2 has issued show cause notice, dated 3
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Telangana High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.