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 W.V.M.P.NO.1662 OF 2008 AND WRIT PETITION NO : 7863 of 2008 Between: M/s. Salute Water House (P) Ltd., Edulapalem, Rep. by its Managing Director, Garlapati Lakshmana Swamy S/o. Venkateswarlu, Guntur District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Secretary to Government, Law Department, secretariat Buildings, Saifabad, Hyderabad. 2 The Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Guntur Division, Guntur. 3 The Commercial Tax Officer, Lalapet Circle, Guntur. .....RESPONDENTS 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 an appropriate writ, order or direction particularly in the nature of Writ of Certiorari after calling for the entire connected records in relation to the proceedings of revision in Rv.No.30/2006-07 dated 11.2.2008 issued by the Deputy Commissioner (CT), Guntur Division, Guntur in relation to assessment year 2002-03 as served on 15.3.2008 by holding the impugned proceedings as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction and without authority of law hit by Section 20 (2A) and ultravires SEction 5F of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 as also Rule 6(3)(i) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Rules, 1957, for the revision proceedings seek to levy tax on contractual receipts in excess of the value of the material transferred as also unconstitutional, violating Entry 54 of the State List VII Schedule to the Constitution of India and contrary to the law laid down by this Hon'ble Court in 136 STC p.586 and the judgment of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal in 34 APSTJ 201 and 35 APSTJ 163 and grant such other relief or reliefs as are deemed to be fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.M.V.J.K.KUMAR 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 connected to the proceedings in Rv.No.30/2006-07 dated 11.2.2008 issued by the Deputy Commissioner (CT), Guntur Division, Guntur pertaining to assessment year 2002-03 and to quash the same as illegal, arbitrary, and contrary to Section 20 (2-A) and ultravires of Section 5F of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 as also Rule 6(3)(i) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Rules, 1957, the petitioner filed this writ petition. The petitioner is a company and an assessee on the rolls of the third respondent. For the Assessment year 2002-2003, the petitioner was assessed to tax by the third respondent on 17.12.2005, granting exemption of tax on a turnover of Rs.6,35,32,360/- representing labour charges and the taxable income was determined at Rs.1,04,30,029/- towards the cost of material used or transferred in the course of packaging contract. While so, the second respondent issued a show cause notice on 16.12.2006 seeking to revise the assessment, to which the petitioner submitted detail objections on 19.1.2007. Eventually, the second respondent confirmed the propose revised tax, without considering objections filed by the petitioner. Hence, the present writ petition. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Special Standing Counsel for Commercial Taxes. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the impugned order dated 11.02.2008 was passed without considering the objections raised by the petitioner and without affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner. It is further contended that there is an embargo placed on the Authority to pass an order as the same is without jurisdiction in view of Sec. 20(2-A) of the A.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1957 in view of the decision of a Full Bench of this court in Indo National Limited Vs. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, A.P., Hyderabad ([1]) that against revision by the designated authorities in respect of any question of law or issue already decided in an appeal by the Tribunal. Learned Special Standing Counsel for Commercial Taxes contends that the petitioner has not availed the opportunity of hearing, even inspite of issuing notice by the respondent. Secondly, he contends that the order impugned herein is an appealable order and, therefore, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed on the ground of availability of statutory appeal. Evidently, even though notice was issued to the petitioner, it did not avail the opportunity of personal hearing, for the reasons beyond its control. Having regard to these facts, without adverting to merits of the issue, we are of the considered view that the impugned order does not stand on the touchstone of principles of natural justice. We, therefore, hold that the petitioner can be afforded an opportunity of personal hearing. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner, subject, however, to the condition of the petitioner depositing 50% of the disputed tax amount before 30.08.2008. On such deposit, the respondents are directed to decide the issue within one month from the date of such deposit, after affording an opportunity to the petitioner. In default of the same, the impugned order becomes operative. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of and the Vacate Miscellaneous Petition is closed. 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{KURR} [1] 136 STC 586