THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S. RAO AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION Nos.32949, 32951 and 32963 of 2010 Dated:30.12.2010 Between: M/s.Bharat Heavy Electrials Limited, (A Govt. of India Undertaking), Power Sector-Southern Region, Rayalaseema Thermal Power Project, Stage III, V.V.Reddy Nagar and Post, Kadapa District, rep., by Its Dy.General Manager (Finance) Mr.C.S.Ravi Shankar .. Petitioner And The Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Office of the Deputy Commissioner (CT), D.No.1/499, opp. To YSR Guest House, Smith Road, Kadapa and another .. Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S. RAO AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION Nos.32949, 32951 and 32963 of 2010 COMMON ORDER: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice V.V.S. Rao) M/s. Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited (BHEL), a Government of India Undertaking, is a registered Value Added Tax (VAT) dealer on the rolls of the second respondent, namely, Commercial Tax Officer, Kadapa- II Circle. The first respondent is the jurisdictional authority prescribed to undertake assessment for the years 2007-2008, 2008-2009 and 2009-2010. The BHEL produced nil tax returns, presumably, for the reason that erection, commissioning and testing is not exercisable to VAT as it does not involve transfer of material. Therefore, it filed refund applications in Form VAT 510 in so far as TDS amount deducted by the Andhra Pradesh Power Generation Corporation Limited (APGENCO) is concerned. By communication No.Tin 28800297602, dated 30.06.2010, the first respondent advised the petitioner to furnish details of the main contractor on whose behalf the work was executed together with details of the remittances and disposal of Form VAT 501-A certificates. It is the case of the petitioner that, in response thereto, the petitioner sent a communication, being No.BHEL:PSSR:RTPP: MUD:AP VAT:750 A, dated 07.07.2010, submitting such clarifications. Even thereafter, it is alleged that the first respondent did not bestow prompt attention to pass orders determining the quantum of refund of VAT. Therefore, these writ petitions are filed. As the prayer made is for a mandamus to direct the respondents to refund amounts and, admittedly, as of now, there is no determination of the refund amount, we are not inclined to pass the order, as prayed for. The Special Counsel for Commercial Taxes submits that, as and when the petitioner submits the necessary information called for, the applications will be processed. In that view of the matter, instead of keeping the matters pending, we dispose them of in the following manner. (i) The petitioner is given two weeks time from today to place all the material, including the material called for by the first respondent in support of their claim for refund. As and when such material is submitted, within four month thereafter, the first respondent shall consider refunding the VAT amount and pass appropriate orders determining the amount of refund under Section 38(1)(b) read with Section 40 of the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2005. (ii) Needless to mention, if so requested, the first respondent shall give an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner. The writ petitioners are, accordingly, disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________ V.V.S. RAO, J ___________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J 30.12.2010 Note:- Dispatch copy of order by 03.01.2011. (B/o) KH