THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.17545 of 2010 Dated:10.08.2010 Between: M/s.ALMASS Stone Industries. …Petitioner and The Commercial Tax Officer, And another. …Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.17545 of 2010 ORDER: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice V.V.S.Rao) The petitioner is engaged in the business of polishing and trading of stones. The petitioner is a registered dealer on the rolls of the first respondent under the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax, 2005 (the Act). Being aggrieved by the assessment order for the period from 2005-2006 to 2009-2010 up to September 2009, he filed the instant writ petition. Be it noted, by impugned assessment order in Form VAT 305, the respondents assessed the tax due for the period mentioned hereinabove, and directed the petitioner to pay the amount within thirty days. Inter alia, it is the contention of the petitioner that the assessment order is not preceded by a mandatory notice, and therefore, the remedy of appeal under Section 31 of the Act is not a bar for entertaining the writ petition. The attention of this Court has been invited by the Standing Counsel for Commercial Tax to the following portion of the impugned order. Accordingly VAT from 305A was issued on to the dealer on 10-03-2010 and dealers were informed over telephone to collect the VAT from 305A from this office. The Dealer did not turn up hence a notice VAT 305A was sent to the their address by registered post on 17-04-2010. The registered post noticed was returned unserved. Again the notice was sent through this office person which has been served on to the dealers on 16-05-2010. From the date of receipt of this notice the dealer did not file any objections even in 15 days. Hence it is constuted that the dealer do not have any objection to file the turnover proposed in the notice VAT form 305A. Hence final order have been passed accordingly and also the turnover proposed on royalty and hamaly charges were calculated on transport was included in the above notice. The same has been reduced and pass orders accordingly. Prima facie, a notice was issued to the petitioner in Form VAT 305A, which was served on the dealer on 16.05.2010. As objections were not filed, the impugned order was passed on 31.05.2010. Therefore, the record belies at least, prima facie, the contention of the petitioner. We may, however, hasten to add that having regard to the availability of an effective alternative remedy, and hierarchy of appeals thereafter, we are not inclined to exercise our discretion at this stage. It is open to the petitioner to raise all grounds including the one, which is raised and adverted to hereinabove, before the appellate authority. Giving liberty to do so, the writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. __________________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) ______________________________ (RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J) 10.08.2010 vs