IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO :27331 of 2009 Between: M/s. Neeraj Pipes Private Limited, Rajendranagar, Ranga Reddy District, rep., by its Director Mr. Pankaj Agarwal ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commercial Tax Officer, Rajendranagar circle, Saroornagar Division, Hyderabad and others. .....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO :27331 of 2009 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) This writ petition is filed challenging the order passed by the 2nd respondent on 7.7.2009. The facts in brief are that the petitioner is carrying on business in manufacture and sale of H.R. Strips, sections and pipes. It is an assessee on the rolls of the 1st respondent. According to the petitioner, a notice in Form VAT 305-A dated 6.6.2009 was issued by the 2nd respondent proposing to assess the petitioner summarily holding that it has under declared the tax due for the period 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007- 08 and 2008-09, and raising an artificial demand of Rs.1,86,80,708/-. As per the notice, the petitioner has to submit the books of accounts within 7 days from the date of receipt of the said notice. As the Accountant of the petitioner was sick, the petitioner could not file any objections to the notice. On that, the 1st respondent issued an urgent notice dated 5.8.2009 to the petitioner stating that “pay an amount of Rs.1,86,80,708/- as per the demand notice in Form VAT 305 issued by the 2nd respondent on 7.7.2009, within seven days from the date of notification”. The said notice was served on the petitioner on 8.8.2009. Hence, the petitioner made a requisition to the 1st respondent vide letter dated 1.9.2009 seeking to issue the assessment proceedings of the 2nd respondent. But without serving any order copy, the 1st respondent is demanding the payment of arrears of tax. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Pleader and perused the material available on record. Leaned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner could not file its objections as its accountant was sick and that the demand made by the 1st respondent for payment of the amount in question, without serving the copy of the order dated 7.7.2009, is in violation of the principles of natural justice. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that an opportunity can be afforded to the petitioner to file its objections before the concerned authorities. Accordingly, the petitioner is given an opportunity to file its objections within a period of six weeks from today on condition that the petitioner shall deposit Rs.20,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty lakhs only) within a period of four weeks from today. The 2nd respondent is directed to dispose of the matter as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law. With the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. __________________________ Justice T. Meena Kumari _________________________ Justice Nooty Ramamohana Rao Date: 15th April, 2010 nn. THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO :27331 of 2009 (Order delivered by the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) 15/04/2010