WP/22951/2020 of M/s. Dharmaja Industries Vs Commercial Tax Officer and Another on 30 December 2020

1. Commercial Tax Officer, Gandhinagar Circle, Secunderabad.Commercial Tax Officer, Gandhinagar Circle, Secunderabad.

1. Commercial Tax Officer, Gandhinagar Circle, Secunderabad.Commercial Tax Officer, Gandhinagar Circle, Secunderabad.2 S-lqte.of relangana, uy its priricipar Secretary to Government, RevenueFep (CT-ll) Department, Secretiriat. Hyderabad.

...RESPONDENTS

Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of lndia praying that in thecircumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleasedto issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction -(a) setting aside the impugned order of the Respondent bearing Ao No.4g470daled 301312020 uploaded on 3ol3t2o2o for the assessment year 2o1s-16 under thecentral sales Tax Act, 1g56 as passed in the name of a wrong entity, in violation ofto issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction -(a) setting aside the impugned order of the Respondent bearing Ao No.4g470daled 301312020 uploaded on 3ol3t2o2o for the assessment year 2o1s-16 under thecentral sales Tax Act, 1g56 as passed in the name of a wrong entity, in violation ofprinciples of natural justice and on non-existent turnover (b) as being wrongfully enforced by demand notice dated 2g/1ol2o2o withoutservice of an authenticated assessment order as per Rule 64 of the Telangana VATRules,2005, and

(c) consequently direct the 'l st Respondent to re-frame the assessment orderafter considering the objections and documentary evidence to be filed by theafter considering the objections and documentary evidence to be filed by thePetitioner and granttng an opportunity of personal hearing lA NO: 1 OF 2020

Petition under section 151 cPC praying that in the circumstances stated inthe affidavit filed in support of lhe petition, the High court may be pleased to grantstay of all further proceedings, pursuant to the impugned order of the 1stRespondent dated 30/3/2020 and demand notice dated 29l1O|2O2O for theassessment year 2015-16 under the CST Act, 1956, pending disposal of the WritPetition as otherwise the Petitioner will be put to severe loss and hardship.Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI KARTHIK RAMANA pUTTAMREDDy Counsel for Respondent No 1: SRI M. GOVIND REDDY,SPL. SC FOR COMMERCIAL TAXESCounsel for Respondent No 2: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAXES

The Court made the following: ORDER

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO

AND

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.AMARNATH GOUD

wRIT PDTITION NO 229stoF 2020

. ^ srr Justice [ORDER:]

rrer srr Justice M_S.Rahachahdra Rao)

In this Writ petition, the petitioner assails the Assessment OrderA.O.No.48470 dt.30.03.2()20 passed by the I'r respondent under the CSTAct, 1956 for the period 2Ol5_16.

2.

2. According to the petitioner, the assessee is N4ls. DharmajaIndusrries registered under the CST Act, 1956, but the impugnedAssessment order was passed in the name of its proprietrix Unra RaniBorra; and that the Assessment Order having been passed against awrong entity, is vitiated.

3. It is further contended that a demand notice dt.29. l0 .2020 wasissued to the petitioner by the I,trespondent demanding payment of taxof Rs.29,62,321l_ for the year 2015_l6under the CST Act and when thepetitioner enquired about the same $ with the l respondent, he wasinformed about the impugned Assessment Order.

4. It is further contended that though the impugned AssessrnentOrder refers to a show_cause notice, reminder notice dt. I9. I I .201 9 andfinal potice dt.O6.O3.2O2O, but none of these notices were served on thepetitionlr and no personar hearing was also afforded to the petitioner andthis has caused serious prejudice to lhe petitioner.

5. Sri M.Covind Reddy, learned Special Counsel lbr CornmercialTaxes appearing for the respondents does not dispute that the assessee is not ulna Rani [Borra, ][that ][she ][is ][only ][the Proprietrix ][of ][the ][petitioner]M/s. Dharmaja [Industries ][and ][the ][Assessment ][order ][was ][passed ][by ][the]1,, respondent against [a ][wrong entity. He ][also ][does ][not ][dispute ][that ][no]show-cause [notice ][or ][other notices ][were ][served ][on ][the]pre-assessment petitioner and no personal [hearing ][was also ][afforded ][to ][the ][petitioner.]

6. Inviewofthesecircumstances,weareoftheopinionthattheorder [is ][vitiated ][and grave prejudice ][has been caused ][to ][the]impugned petitioner on account [of ][violation ][of ][principles ][of ][natural ][justice by ][the]1'r respondent.

1. Accordingly, the [Writ ][Petition ][is ][allowed; ][the ][impugned]Assessrnent order [A.o.N ][o.48470 ][d1.30.03.2020 ][passed ][by ][the ][I't]respondent [is ][set ][aside; ][the matter is remitted ][back ][to ][the ][l" ][respondent]for fresh consideration; [the ][1'1 ][respondent ][shall ][issue a show-cause ][notice]to the petitioner [indicating ][the ][turnover ][proposed ][to ][be ][taxed and the tax]proposed to be levied [thereon ][in ][accordance ][with ][Rule ][64(l)(b) ][of ][the]TVAT Rules, [2005; the ][petitioner is ][granted ][six (6) ][weeks ][time ][from ][the]date of receipt [of ][the ][said ][show-cause ][notice ][to file ][objections ][thereto]with [supporting material; a ][personal ][hearing ][shall ][be afforded ][to]along the petitioner [by ][the ][l't ][respondent; and ][then a ][reasoned ][order shall ][be]passed by the l" [respondent ][in ][accordance ][rvith ][larv ][and communicated]to the [petitioner. No ][costs.]

\

8. Pcnding [miscellaneous Petitions'][ if ][any, ][in this ][Writ ][Petition ][shall]

stand [closed.]

,rRUE coPY// ^,.:3+iN+"*t'it$'#Htlr/SECTION [OFFICER]

To,1 . The Commercial [Tax Officer' GandhinSgar Circla-Secunderabad]? rhe Princioal Secretary [tliTi;i#;; ](CT-ll) Department' [state ][ot]' +;ir;;;;JSecretariat, Hvderabad'Hvderabad'[[of ][Telansana]][[Telansana]]

+;ir;;;;JSecretariat, Hvderabad'Hvderabad'3 Two ics [to ][cp ][to, ][co*rlElli2,Tii*xes ]"nEve[Hig Courl for the State ]nue [[of ][Telansana]][[Telansana]]

, t?u"'J" to [sri ][Karthik Ramana ][Puttam-re-dgv ][Advocate ][toPUCl]5. one cc [to Sri ][rv. ][cou,ni'n;i;;, ][s;j. ][6c ][# ][comm"rc,at ][f3xs5 ][(oPUC)]

6. Two [CD CoPies]N/BC{L,

b

HIGH COURT

DATED: [3011212020]

';'Ar€soo0 7 JAil [2021]a.L**ORDER

WP.No.22951 [of ][2020]

ALLOWING [OF THE ][WRIT ][PETITION AT]THE STAGE [OF ][ADMISSION, WITHOUT ][COSTS]