IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO WRIT PETITION Nos. 245 and 249 of 2007 WRIT PETITION NO : 245 of 2007 Between: M/s. Variety Agencies, Shot No. 11, Paradise Complex, P.G. Road, Secunderabad, ..... PETITIONER AND The Commercial Tax officer, Begumpet Circle, Pavani Prestige, 5th Floor, .....RESPONDENT 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 writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction declaring the action of the respondent in passing the re-assessment proceedings dt.15-12-2006 under section 14(4) of the AP General Sales Tax Act for the assessment year 2002-03 as arbitrary, contrary to law and also contrary to decisions of this Hon'ble Court and the decisions of Apex Court of India and in violation of principles of natural justice and consequently set aside the same as without jurisdiction and null and void and pass such other order or orders as the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. AND WRIT PETITION NO : 249 of 2007 Between: M/s. Variety Agencies, Shot No. 11, Paradise Complex, P.G. Road, Secunderabad, ..... PETITIONER AND The Commercial Tax officer, Begumpet Circle, Pavani Prestige, 5th Floor, .....RESPONDENT 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 writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction declaring the action of the respondent in passing the re-assessment proceedings dt.15-12-2006 under section 14(4) of the AP General Sales Tax Act for the assessment year 2004-05 as arbitrary, contrary to law and also contrary to decisions of this Hon'ble Court and the decisions of Apex Court of India and in violation of principles of natural justice and consequently set aside the same as without jurisdiction and null and void and pass such other order or orders as the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.SHAIK JEELANI BASHA Counsel for the Respondent: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Mr.Justice B.Prakash Rao) Since common questions are involved in these two writ petitions, they are being taken up together for disposal. The petitioner herein, who is an assessee under the provisions of A.P. General Sales Tax Act (for brevity ‘the Act’) while carrying on business in Variety Agencies and are registered dealers on the rolls, files these writ petitions inter alia seeking for a mandamus assailing the correctness of the orders of re-assessment passed by the respondent herein on 15/12/2006 purportedly under Section 14 (4) of the Act for the assessment years 2002-03 and 2004-05. The main grievance of the petitioner in brief, without going into the merits or the facts and circumstances as such, is that the officer who passed the initial order of assessment for the very same year on 30/11/2005 has passed the impugned order which is on 15/12/2006. No doubt, this was preceded by issuance of show cause notice on 13/11/2006 and asking for explanation and objections, if any. The petitioner filed explanation and objections on 15/12/2006 raising several aspects including as to the correctness, competency and also merits to say that there is absolutely no warrant for such reassessment. However, without considering the said objections, the respondent passed the impugned order on the same day. Hence, the writ petitions. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also on perusal of the material on record, it is seen that the impugned order was passed without going into the merits and the correctness of the pleas raised and that the objections raised by the petitioner herein which have been filed on 15/12/2006 have undoubtedly remained unconsidered. It is on the same day of filing of the objections, the impugned order came to be passed. In view of the same, it is needless to reiterate that necessarily an opportunity should be given to file objections and the same need to be considered on merits. In the absence thereof, it would amount to violation of principles of natural justice and also impropriety. In the circumstances, both the Writ Petitions are allowed. The impugned order dated 15/12/2006 is set aside, and the respondent is directed to consider the matter afresh on merits in accordance with law after giving notice and opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. No costs. _________________ B.PRAKASH RAO, J ________________ R.KANTHA RAO, J Date: 10-07-2009 SKM