IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 18445 of 2008 Between: M/s. Gold Fields Plot No.132 Industrial Estate Nellore 524001 Rep.by its Managing Partner Mr.B.Krishna Kumar ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commercial Tax Officer-II Nellore 2 The Joint Commissioner(CT) Legal(FAC) Office of the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes Opp. Gandhi Bhavan M.J Road Hyderabad-500001 .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 to issue an appropriate writ or order direction more particualrly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in passing the proceedings dt.22-7-2008 for the assessment year 2001-02 as arbitrary contrary to the provisions of the APGST act and also in violation of principles of natural justice and Rule of Law and consequently to set aside the same and as null and void and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.SHAIK JEELANI BASHA Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 18445 of 2008 ORAL ORDER: (per T HE HON’BLE MRS. JUST ICE T .MEENA KUMARI) This writ petition is questioning the proceedings of the 2nd respondent dated 22.7.2008 in suo motu reviewing the passed by the Appellate Deputy Commissioner and restoring the assessment order dated 25.3.2003 passed by the 1st respondent. Aggrieved by the assessment order passed by the 1st respondent dated 25.3.2003, the petitioner herein preferred appeal before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), Guntur who by proceedings dated 30.7.2004 allowed the appeal. While so, the 2nd respondent proposed to suo mottu review the order of the appellate authority by issuing notice dated 30.6.2008 and eventually passed the order impugned in the present writ petition. Heard both sides. Learned Counsel for the petitioner argued that the petitioner was asked to submit his objections within 15 days by issuing notice dated 30.6.2008 which was served on the petitioner on 7.7.2008. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner has got issued reply dated 15.7.2008 through their Chartered Accountant and also issued a telegram seeking time up to 15.8.2008 to submit their objections to the show cause notice. The main grievance of the petitioner is that without considering the request made by the petitioner and even before the expiry of time granted to submit objections, the impugned order came to be passed which is in violation of the principles of natural justice. Having regard to the fact that the 2nd respondent passed the impugned order without aﬀording the petitioner opportunity of ﬁling objections, we deem it appropriate that ends of justice would be met if the petitioner is granted time by two weeks from today to ﬁle his objections to the show cause notice and thereafter the 2nd respondent shall pass an order on merits in accordance with law. If the petitioner fails to submit his objections, as directed, the impugned order becomes operative. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. ______________________ T.MEENA KUMARI, J. ____________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J. Dated:08.09.2008 ASP/GS