WP/27744/2008 of M/s.Chloride International Limited Vs The Commercial Tax Officer on 29 December 2008

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

MONDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAMand THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR

WRIT PETITION No.27744 of 2008

Between:

M/s.Chloride International Limited Plot No.98 106&107 1st FloorTadbund X Road Secunderabad Rep.by its Branch Accountant Mrs Geetha Vani

..... PETITIONER

AND

1 The Commercial Tax Officer Khairatabad Circle Hyderabad 2 Assistant Commissioner(CT) Intel Punjagutta Division,Hyderabad

.....RESPONDENTS

Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying thatin the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Courtwill be pleased to to issue an appropriate writ or direction moreparticuarly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring theimpugned order dt 23-9-2008 passed by the 1st respondent forassessment year 2005-20069(CST) as illegal unjutified and contrary tothe provisions of law and violative of principle of natural justice and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.J.V.RAO

Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX

The Court made the following :

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAMand THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR

WRIT PETITION No.27744 of 2008

ORDER:(per the Hon’ble Sri Justice Goda Raghuram)

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learnedStanding Counsel for Commercial Taxes for the respondents.

What is impeached in this writ petition is the order of the 1[st]respondent, dated 23-09-2008, whereby for the assessment year 2005-06, under the CST Act, 1956, the 1[st] respondent assessed the liability ofthe petitioner at Rs.38,46,150/- after recording the tax paid atRs.1,23,077/- and spelt out the balance due at Rs.37,23,073/-.

The petitioner is a registered dealer under the rolls of the 1[st]respondent and for the assessment year 2005-06 filed returns before the1[st] respondent setting out the turnover and paid the taxes thereon. The2[nd] respondent issued a show cause notice, dated 14-07-2008proposing to finalise the assessment and eventually by the order, dated19-08-2008 passed the assessment demanding an amount ofRs.12,58,429/-. The petitioner filed an appeal before the AppellateDeputy Commissioner (CT), Punjagutta Division, Hyderabad, aggrievedby the assessment order, dated 19-08-2008 of the 2[nd] respondent. Thisappeal is stated to be pending. While so, the 1[st] respondent issued anotice, dated 11-08-2008 (served on the petitioner on 23-08-2008),proposing to finalise the assessment for the same year and even beforethe petitioner could submit a reply thereto, passed the impugned order ofassessment, dated 23-09-2008, even though an order of assessmentfor the year 2005-06 was already passed by the 2[nd] respondent on 19-08-2008, where against, the petitioner had preferred an appeal to theAppellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), Punjagutta Division, Hyderabad. In the facts and circumstances of the case, which are not disputedby the learned Special Standing Counsel for the respondents, appearingon instructions, the impugned second order of assessment passed bythe 1[st] respondent, dated 23-09-2008, cannot be sustained and is accordingly quashed. The writ petition is allowed. There shall however be no order asto costs.____________________GODA RAGHURAM, J__________________SANJAY KUMAR, JDate: 29-12-2008Prv

..... REGISTRAR// TRUE COPY //SECTION OFFICERTo 1.2CCs to2.2CD copiesForm-NIC-OGS/WP{BMR}