IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 14578 of 2008 Between: M/s. Khurja Traders, Plot No. 60/A/1, Phase-I, Road No.7, IDA, Jeedimetla, Ranga Reddy District, Rep. by its Sole Proprietor Mr. S.P. Jain. ..... PETITIONER AND Government of Andhra Pradesh, Commercial Tax Department, Rep. by Commercial Tax Officer, Jeedimetla Circle, 2nd Floor, Gangan Vihar, Opp Gandhi Bhavan, Nampally, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENT Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a Writ, Direction or Order more in the nature of Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ by calling for the records of the Respondent for the impugned Revised Assessment order in File Asst. No. -/2002-03 (APGST) dated 09-05-2008 for the year 2002-03 issued by the Commercial Tax Officer, and consequential demand notice dated 09-05-2008 vide Assessment No. APGST /2002-03 for Rs. 1,18,769/- and quash them as the same as ultra vires the provisions of Section 5B of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 hence without jurisdiction and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.MINNIKANTI LAXMIPRASAD Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following : ORAL ORDER: (per THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI) Seeking a writ of certiorari to call for the records relating to the impugned Revised Assessment Order in File Asst. No. /2002-3(APGST) dated 9.5.2008 for the year 2002- 2003 issued by the Commercial Tax Officer, Jeedimetla Circle and the consequential demand notice dated 09.05.2008 raising a demand for Rs.1,18,769/- and to quash the same, the petitioner filed this writ petition. The petitioner is carrying on business as Distributors and Suppliers of L.T. and H.T. Overhead Line Materials and it had been charging 4% of Sales Tax against the sales. While so, the respondent has revised the assessment for the year 2002-2003 vide the impugned order on the ground that the ‘G’ Forms issued in favour of the petitioner are invalid and it has to pay full tax at 8% instead of concessional rate of 4% and thus raised the demand of Rs.1,18,769/-. Hence, the present writ petition. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Special Standing Counsel for Commercial Taxes. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that though the petitioner has submitted reply dated 3.5.2008, to the notice dated 1.5.208 issued by the respondent, the respondent did not consider the same and levied the tax. The learned Special Standing Counsel Commercial Taxes contends inasmuch as the impugned order is an appealable order, the petitioner ought to have preferred an appeal to the Appellate Authority instead of invoking writ jurisdiction and, therefore, writ petition is not maintainable. Having regard to the fact that against the order impugned, appeal lies to the Appellate Deputy Commissioner, without expressing any opinion on merits, we dismiss the writ petition with a liberty to the petitioner to avail the remedy of statutory appeal, if it is so advised. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. ____________________ Justice T.Meena Kumari _______________________ Justice Ramesh Ranganathan July 8, 2008 MAS ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{SPJS}