IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO : 4486 of 2009 Between: M/s. Hindalco Industries Ltd., IDA Jeedimetla, with Area Sales Office at Secunderabad, Rep.by its Manager Accounts, Mr.V.Srisha ..... PETITIONER AND The Prl. Secretary to Government Revenue (CT-II) Department, Secretariat Buildings, Saifabad, Hyderabad and another .....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following : ORAL ORDER: (per THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI) Seeking a writ of mandamus declaring the impugned Memo No.10717/CT. II(1)2008-1 dated 17.4.2008 superceding the benefit available in GO Ms. No. 97 Revenue (CT.II) Department dated 25.1.2003 as illegal and without jurisdiction and consequently to set aside the assessment order passed by the Asst. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, LTU, Hyderabad Rural Division, Hyderabad dated 24.2.2009, the petitioner filed this writ petition. The petitioner is a Limited Company and is a registered dealer on the rolls of the second respondent under APGST Act and CST Act. It is the case of the petitioner that right from 25.1.2003, the levy of tax on inter-State sales in respect of aluminium ingots and wire rods shall be at the rate of 1% in terms of GO Ms. No. 97 and Memo No. 3164 dated 18.1.2008. While so, the second respondent issued show cause notice to the petitioner on 20.11.2008 denying the benefit granted under the above G.O. on the basis of the Memo No. 10717/CT.II(1)/2008-01 on 17.4.2008. Even though the petitioner had submitted detailed representation, assessment order dated 24.2.2009 came to be passed. Assailing the Memo dated 17.4.2008 and the consequential assessment order, the present writ petition is filed. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Special Standing Counsel for Commercial Taxes. When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned Special Standing Council for Commercial Taxes has submitted that the Government has issued Memo No. 49399/CT.II(1)/2008-3 dated 16.5.2009 clarifying the issue as to the applicability of GO Ms. No.97 dated 25.1.2003 and restricting it to four categories of products. Clause 6 of the Memo No. 49399/CT.II(1)/2008-3 dated 16.5.2009 clarifies that the clarification issued in Govt. Memo dated 17.4.2008, impugned in this writ petition, shall be applied prospectively, subject to the condition that the tax, if any, collected exceeding 1% by the dealers shall be forfeited to the Government. In view of the said clarification the impugned assessment order is liable to be set aside for re- assessment of the liability of the petitioner for the assessment year 2005-2006. Consequently the assessment order dated 24.2.2009 is set aside and the writ petition is allowed remanding the matter to the second respondent for fresh assessment of the liability of the petitioner for the assessment year 2005-2006. No order as to costs. ____________________ Justice T.Meena Kumari __________________________ Justice Nooty Ramamohana Rao March 2, 2010 MAS