Telangana High Court
WP/38904/2012 of M/s. Crown Beers India Private Limited, Vs Commercial Tax Officer, on 31 December 2012
SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO Writ Petition No. 38904 of 2012 Dated: 31-12-2012 Between: M/s Crown Beers India Private Limited, rep. by its Director Kamal Saboo. …Petitioner And Commercial Tax Officer, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAMANDTHE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAOWrit Petition No. 38904 of 2012
Dated: 31-12-2012
Between:M/s Crown Beers India Private Limited, rep. by itsDirector Kamal Saboo.
AndCommercial Tax Officer,Jubilee Hills,Hyderabad.
…Petitioner
…Respondent.
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAMANDTHE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAOWrit Petition No. 38904 of 2012
Oral order(Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Goda Raghuram)
Heard Sri Dwarakanath, learned counsel for the petitioner andSri Venkatadri, learned Special Govt. pleader for Commercial Taxesfor the respondent.
The Order of Assessment dated 10-12-2012 in respect of theyear 2009-10 under the CST Act, 1956 is challenged by the petitioneron several grounds including that the respondent was not authorizedto pass an Order of Assessment and that by the impugned order ofAssessment, tax is levied at 70 per cent on turnovers not covered by‘C’ forms and turnovers not covered by ‘F’ forms treating the later asinter-state sales. While in the show-cause notice dated 17-8-2010 therespondent proposed to bring the net turnover not covered by ‘C’, ‘F’and ‘H’ forms at 12.5 per cent or 14.5 per cent, as the case may betreating them as exigable to tax at the rates stipulated in the VSchedule of the AP VAT Act, 2005.
On obtaining instructions and a consideration of the show-causenotice dated 17-8-2010 and the impugned Order of Assessment dated10-12-2012, the learned Govt. Pleader fairly concedes the position thatlevy of CST at 70 poer cent in the impugned Order of Assessment is atvariance with the proposals in the show-cause notice dated 17-8-2010.
In view of the submission on behalf of the respondent-Revenue and the demonstrable fact that the petitioner had been assessed toliability to CST at 70 per cent, while in the show-cause notice dated17-8-2010 the turnover not covered by ‘C’ and ‘F’ forms, was proposedto be taxed at the rate of 12.5 per cent and 14.5 per cent apparentlyunder Schedule-V of the APVAT Act, 2005, the petitioner was denieda reasonable opportunity of representing against the higher quantumof liability assessed. The Order of Assessment cannot therefore besustained and is accordingly quashed.
It is however open to the competent Assessing authority to passa fresh Order of Assessment in accordance with law and after due andreasonable opportunity to the petitioner.
In the light of the fact that the impugned Order of Assessment isset aside on the ground of denial of reasonable opportunity, we do notfind it appropriate to consider the other challenges to the Order ofAssessment urged in the writ petition. These are left open, shouldthese other objections survive in any fresh Order of Assessment to bepassed by the competent authority.
The writ petition is allowed. No costs.
_________________________
GODA RAGHURAM, J
31[st] December, 2012
GRR
_______________________________
M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO, J