HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No:20256 OF 2007 Dated:12.02.2008 Between: M/s. Reliance Slate Works, Markapur, rep., by its Proprietor Gayam Venkata Kotireddy. ..Petitioner And The Commercial Tax Officer, Markapur, Prakasam District and another. ..Respondents HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No:20256 OF 2007 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) The present writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking to call for relevant records relating to the notice in Form-IV, dated 23.8.2007 issued by the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Markapur, seeking to recover the amount mentioned in the notice for the assessment year 2000-01 even without mentioning the relevant particulars, and to declare the impugned notice as illegal and arbitrary. The main grievance of the petitioner is that for the assessment year 2000-01, an assessment order was passed and thereafter, on 9.2.2005, the Deputy Commissioner (CT), Nellore, issued revision show cause notice proposing to revise the assessment. The petitioner also filed its objections. Thereafter, the petitioner did not receive any kind of notice or order thereon from the revisional authority. While so, the impugned notice was issued by the 2nd respondent demanding tax in question. Having aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Special Standing Counsel for Commercial Tax and perused the material available on record. It is the contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has filed objections for the show cause notice issued by the revisional authority and thereafter, the petitioner was not served with any kind of order or notice thereon and therefore, the 2nd respondent is not justified in issuing the impugned notice. No material has been adduced before this Court to show as to whether the Revisional authority has passed any orders after filing of the objections by the petitioner. In this view of the matter and in the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, We feel it a fit case wherein the revisional authority can be directed to pass appropriate orders after affording an opportunity to the petitioner enabling it to file the objections afresh, but subject to condition of the petitioner depositing 50% of the disputed tax, within a period of six weeks from today. However, it is made clear that the amount paid if any, shall be given credit to the above stipulated sum. It is needless to observe that till the disposal of the revision, there shall be stay of the impugned notice. It is also made clear that the petitioner is at liberty to file objections afresh, within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. Subject to the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. _______________________ Justice T. Meena Kumari _________________ Justice G. Rohini Date: 12th February, 2008 Nn. HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No:20256 OF 2007 (Order delivered by the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) 12.02.2008