THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S. RAO AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.9113 of 2010 Dated:13.07.2010 Between: M/s.P.Pundarikasha Rao .. Petitioner And The Additional Commissioner (CT), Legal, 2nd Floor, Commercial Taxes Comples, Opp. Gandhi Bhavan, Nampally, Hyderabad And others .. Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S. RAO AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT APPEAL No.9113 of 2010 ORDER: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice V.V.S. Rao) The petitioner assails the order dated 17.03.2010 of the first respondent, whereby and whereunder, in exercise of powers under Section 20(2) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 (the Act), the first respondent re-determined the net turnover of the petitioner taxable at 8% under Section 5F of the Act. In brief the fact of the matter is that for the year 2002-2003, third respondent determined the net turnover of the petitioner at Rs.1,14,30,277/-. While doing so, out of the total turnover of Rs.3,40,92,932/-, the exempted turnover of Rs.2,26,62,655/- was deducted. The petitioner’s appeal before second respondent was partly allowed insofar as certain items representing recoveries, value addition, value of work and Tax Deduction at Source (TDS). The Appellate Deputy Commissioner re-determined the net turnover in the following manner. Total turnover : Rs.3,40,92,932=00 Exempted turnover : Rs.2,28,56,971=00 Net turnover : Rs.1,12,35,961=00 Tax due : Rs. 8,98,877=00 Tax paid : -Nil- Balance : Rs. 8,98,877=00 The first respondent then initiated revision under Section 20(2) of the Act and issued a show cause notice dated 26.02.2010 calling upon the petitioner to submit objections within ten days. The petitioner sent a communication dated 15.03.2010 requesting two months time for filing objections. On the ground that the grant of such time would bar exercise of revisional jurisdiction, the time was refused and the first respondent re-determined the net turnover as noticed hereinabove. Learned counsel makes the only submission that as per the Circular being CCT’s Ref.No.L-V(2)/144/2010, dated 04.05.2010, all officers are required to give two to three opportunities of 10 to 15 days each to file their objections or appear for personal hearing. Therefore, he contends that even if two months time is not granted for filing objections, reasonable time ought to have been granted to the petitioner having regard to the circumstances of the case. After perusing the impugned order and hearing learned counsel for both sides, we do not find any grave error in first respondent coming to a conclusion that the revision would be barred by limitation by 31.03.2006. However, having regard to Section 24-A of the Act, we deem it proper to give one more opportunity to the petitioner to file the necessary books of accounts maintained under Rule 45(1-C) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Rules, 1957 and all other books to justify the claimed exemption of turnover. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order of the first respondent and remand the matter for fresh consideration after considering the objections that shall be filed by the petitioner within a period of ten days from today. Be it noted that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. The Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of. _____________ V.V.S. RAO, J ___________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J 13.07.2010 Note: Dispatch C.C. today. (B/o) KH