IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO : 28456 of 2009 Dated: 29.4.2010 Between: M/s Hyderabad Security & Offset Printers Limited, Uppal, Hyderabad, rep., by its Managing Director K. Vijayapal Reddy ..... PETITIONER AND Commercial Tax Officer, Hyderguda Circle, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENT The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO : 28456 of 2009 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) This writ petition is filed challenging the order of assessment dated 14.10.2009 passed by the respondent in respect of the assessment year 2003-04. It is the case of the petitioner that aggrieved by the order of assessment passed by the respondent, it had filed an appeal before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT) Secunderabad and the said appeal was partly allowed, partly remanded and partly dismissed. Now, the grievance of the petitioner is that while implementing the orders of the Appellate Deputy Commissioner, the respondent issued notice dated 2.4.2009 calling upon the petitioner to produce the documentary evidence in respect of interstate sales against ‘C’ forms and export sales, though the petitioner is required to file the ‘C’ forms only as per the orders of the appellate authority. On that, the petitioner sought time for compliance as its representative was unable to attend to official work due to personal reasons. But the respondent passed order dated 14.10.2009 without giving any opportunity of hearing. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Special Standing Counsel for Commercial Tax and perused the material available on record. It is the contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the respondent has exceeded his jurisdiction in passing the impugned order. He further stated that since the impugned order is passed without giving any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, the same is liable to be set aside. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the impugned order was passed without affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, we feel it appropriate to remand the matter to the respondent to pass appropriate orders afresh. Accordingly, the order impugned herein is set aside and the matter is remanded to the respondent for passing appropriate orders afresh in accordance with law, after giving due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. __________________________ Justice T. Meena Kumari ______________________________ Justice Nooty Ramamohana Rao Date: 29th April, 2010 Nn/pnb. THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO :28456 of 2009 (Order delivered by the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) 29/04/2010