Sarala Project Works Private Limited vs Commissioner of Commercial Taxes

G. Rohini, J.—This Appeal is preferred u/s 35 of the A.P. Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (for short, ''the V.A.T. Act'') against the order dated 16.11.2013 passed by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. We have heard the learned counsel for both the parties.

The material available on record shows that the appellant herein, a registered dealer under the provisions of the A.P. Value Added Tax Act, 2005, was assessed for the tax period from April, 2008 to March, 2009 by order dated 09.11.2009 passed in Form V.A.T.-305 by the Assistant Commissioner (C.T.), Audit-II, Abids Division, Hyderabad.

Having proposed to revise the said order, in exercise of the powers conferred u/s 32 of the A.P. V.A.T. Act, the respondent -Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad issued a show-cause notice dated 31.10.2013 calling upon the appellant to show cause as to why the Assessment Order dated 09.11.2009 should not be set aside and the refund money of Rs. 19,25,936/- should not be forfeited. Thereafter, the impugned order dated 16.11.2013 came to be passed revising the order dated 09.11.2009 and forfeiting the sum of Rs. 19,25,936/-. Aggrieved by the same, the present Special Appeal is filed u/s 35 of the A.P. V.A.T. Act.

Though the impugned order is challenged raising various questions of law, it is primarily contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that the said order came to be passed without giving a reasonable opportunity to the appellant to make its representation against the show-cause notice dated 31.10.2013.

A perusal of the impugned order shows that the show-cause notice was served on the appellant, and in response to the same the appellant by letter dated 05.11.2013 requested one month time for filing the written objections. However, the appellant was granted time only upto 13.11.2013. Though the appellant by letter dated 16.11.2013 made a request for further extension of 15 days, the respondent refused to grant any such time on the ground that the revision is getting barred by limitation by 18.11.2013.

In the light of the facts and circumstances noticed above, particularly in view of the fact that the respondent sought to revise the Assessment Order which was finalised long ago in the year 2009, it appears to us that the request of the appellant for grant of further time for filing the written objections cannot be held to be unreasonable. Hence, we deem it appropriate to set aside the order under appeal and remand the matter back for consideration afresh.

Accordingly, the impugned order dated 16.11.2013 as well as the consequential proceedings of the Commercial Tax Officer dated 18.11.2013 are set aside, and the appellant is hereby permitted to submit objections in writing within four (4) weeks from today. Thereafter, it is open to the respondent to consider the same and pass an appropriate order afresh in accordance with law.

The Special Appeal is accordingly disposed of. No costs. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Special Appeal shall stand closed.