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 : 7731 of 2009 Between: M/s. SVPCL Ltd., Ameerpet, Hyderabad, Rep.by its Managing Director, Mr. K.Mallikarjuna Reddy ..... PETITIONER AND The Commercial Tax Officer, Sanathnagar Circle, Hyderabad and others .....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following : ORAL ORDER: (per THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI) Seeking a writ of mandamus declaring action of the third respondent ion passing the order dated 24.1.2009 requiring the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.6,01,16,120/- towards the tax due for the period from 1.4.2005 to 31.12.2008, as illegal, arbitrary and without authority of law and contrary to the provisions of APVAT Act and to declare that the sale of note books, text books, study material meant for school and college students are exempted under Entry 5 to Schedule I of the APGST Act, 2005, the petitioner filed this writ petition. The petitioner is a Limited Company and is a registered dealer on the rolls of the first respondent under APGST Act, APVAT Act and CST Act. The second respondent had inspected the business premises of the petitioner at Hyderabad and Vijayawada and directed for the production of certain records and also issued form 555, summoning the books of accounts. While so, the third respondent issued Form 305-A on 24.7.2008 proposing to assess the petitioner to tax for the tax period from 1.4.2005 to 31.12.2007, to which the petitioner filed a representation to the effect that since the books of accounts were already filed with the Department, they are unable to submit their objections. To a subsequent notice of personal hearing, the petitioner submitted representations explaining that the books of accounts were seized by the Income Tax Department on 16.10.2008 and requested for the grant of time. To the notice dated 7.1.2009 issued by the third respondent to produce purchase and sale invoices, the petitioner filed a letter dated 15.1.2009 requesting for the grant of time. Eventually, the third respondent levied a demand of Rs.6,21,99,120/- for the assessment years 2005-06 to 2007-08 on the ground that the petitioner did not produce the original purchase and sale vouchers. Assailing the same, the present writ petition is filed. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Special Standing Counsel for Commercial Taxes. As can be seen from the record, when the above writ petition had come up for admission on 21.01.2010, this court passed the following order: We have heard the learned counsel for petitioner and learned Government Pleader. Admittedly, the books of accounts, sale and purchase invoices seized by the Income Tax and Commercial Tax authorities were returned to petitioner recently and are available with petitioner. Therefore, we deem it proper to give ten (10) days time to petitioner to produce relevant details with regard to sales from exempted commodities and other commodities. The impugned assessment order shows that since the petitioner company did not produce the relevant books of accounts, it was mulcted with the above tax liability. Under the above circumstances, we are of the considered view that the impugned order deserves to be set aside and the matter warrants remand for re-assessment of the tax liability in accordance with law, inasmuch as the books of accounts, sale and purchase vouchers, etc. are very recently returned by the respective Departments. Consequently, the impugned order dated 24.1.2009 is set aside and the writ petition is allowed, remanding the matter to the first respondent for fresh assessment of the tax liability of the petitioner for the period from 1.4.2005 to 31.12.2008 in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No order as to costs. The petitioner is directed to produce all the relevant books of accounts, sale and purchase invoices and the relevant documents, under which it proposes to claim exemption before 31.3.2010. ____________________ Justice T.Meena Kumari __________________________ Justice Nooty Ramamohana Rao March 2, 2010 MAS