IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 7173 of 2008 Between: M/s. Eagle Distilleries, 2/13(10), 2nd Floor, DNR Towers, Kotireddy Street, Kadapa - 516001, rep. by its Manager, Mr. Y. Satyanarayana ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Assistant Commissioner (CT) LTU, Kadapa Division, Kadapa. 2 Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by Secretary Revenue (CT) Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. (2nd respondent is not necessary part) .....RESPONDENTS 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 issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction (a)declaring clause (iii) of sub-section (4) of Section 67 of APVAT Act, 2005 as ultra vires, Section 31 of the APVAT Act as it curtails the power of assessing authorities who are exercising quasi judicial functions in taking independent decisions and also the valid right of appeal provided under Section 31 of APVAT Act in view of its binding nature and also declare that any order passed by Clarification and Advance Ruling Authority is binding only on the authorities with reference to the particular assessee in whose case the order was passed by Advance Ruling Authority; ` (b) declare that the levy of tax under Section 4(4) is not leviable in the facts and circumstances of the case; and (c) consequently set aside the impugned orders passed by the 1st respondent dated 01.03.2008 in Form VAT 305 in levying tax under Section 4(4) of the APVACT Act, 2005 for the period 2005-06, and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.DWARAKANATH Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following : THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MEENA KUMARI AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN. * * * WRIT PETITION No. 7173 OF 2008. ORAL JUDGMENT : (Per the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari ) The present writ petition is filed on the ground that the assessment order was passed without hearing the petitioner- establishment and initially this court has granted interim in WPMP.No.9418 of 2008 while admitting the main writ petition. 2. In the counter-affidavit, it is stated that no personal hearing was afforded to the petitioner-establishment, as the objections were exhaustive and the issue involved was only one of interpretation of statute but not discovery of any factual evidence. 3. However, in view of the fact that the writ petitioner was not afforded an opportunity of personal hearing, which amounts to violative of the principles of natural justice. We are of the opinion that without into the merits, the matter can be remanded back to the first respondent to dispose of the matter afresh after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing the petitioner on or before 30-8- 2008 on merits and in accordance with law. 4. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. ____________________ T. MEENA KUMARI, J. _________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J 03-07-2008. I s L .... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{MSN}