IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.V.SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO : 16654 of 2008 Between: M/s.Swagruha Pickles and Powders, Kannuru Vijayawada Rep. by its Proprietor C.Ratna Kishore ..... PETITIONER AND Deputy Commercial Tax Officer Patamata,Vijayawada .....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 an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly in the nature of Mandamus declaring that the action of the respondent in passing the impugned revised assessment order in G.I No.7199/2004-05 dt.29-1-2008 for the Assessment Year 2005-05 APGST without giving opportunity to the petitioner in violation of the principles of natural justice and without having jurisdiction as illegal and unsustainable and consequently set aside the same and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.G.NARENDRA CHETTY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX 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 respondent in passing the revised assessment Order in G.I. No. 7199/2004-2005 dated 29.1.2008 for the assessment year 2004-2005 by the respondent as illegal and arbitrary and consequently to set aside the same, the petitioner filed this writ petition. The petitioner is a registered dealer under the A.P.G.S.T. Act on the rolls of the respondent and doing business in pickles and powders. For the assessment year 2004-2005, the petitioner was levied tax on the turnover at 8% and on the turnover relating to the first sales of powders at 4%. Subsequently, the respondent issued show cause notice dated 27.12.2007 proposing to increase the rate of tax from 4% to 12% which was served on the petitioner on 12.03.2008 to which the petitioner submitted objections. However, the Revised Assessment Order was served on 14.7.2008, which was purported to have been passed on 29.01.2008 viz., even before the service of show cause notice on 27.12.2007. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Solicitor General appearing for the respondents. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that when the show cause notice was served on the petitioner on 12.3.2008, the question of passing the revised assessment order on 29.1.2008 does not arise. He further contends that in any event, passing the revised assessment order, without serving show cause notice is clearly infringement of principles of natural justice. Counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent admitting service of show cause notice on the petitioner on 12.3.2008, but it is stated that due to inadvertence, the date is put as 29.1.2008 instead of 29.3.2008, while signing the order, which is patently a bonafide mistake. A perusal of the impugned order, no doubt, shows that while singing the order, the date is put as 29.01.2008 and the month typewritten as ‘03’ is also corrected in ink as ‘01’. In view of these facts, without adverting to merits or otherwise of the contentions raised in this writ petition, we set aside the impugned order and remand the matter back to the respondent for passing an order afresh in accordance with law within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after affording an opportunity to the petitioner. With this direction, the writ petition is allowed. No order as to costs. ____________________ Justice T.Meena Kumari ______________________ Justice P.V. Sanjay Kumar August 11, 2008 MAS ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{BMR}