A writ petition filed by a tax dealer challenging penalty proceedings and an arrear notice was dismissed. The court observed that while the appeal was not numbered due to missing documents, the petitioner had excluded the effective alternative remedy.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY
WRIT PETITION No.11622 of 2012
Dated:25.04.2012
Between:
M/s.Aditya Auto Engineers and Technicians.
Petitioner
And Asst.Commissioner (CT), Audit, Saroor Nagar Division, Manoranjan Complex, M.J.Road, Nampally, Hyderabad, And others.
... Respondents
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO AND
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY
WRIT PETITION No.11622 of 2012
ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice V.V.S.Rao)
The petitioner firm is a dealer under the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (the Act), on the rolls of the second respondent. In pursuance of the authorisation issued by the competent authority, the first respondent audited the petitioner’s accounts which ended in an assessment order dated 08.08.2011. The petitioner assailed the same in W.P.No.24956 of 2011. The order of the first respondent was quashed giving liberty to
undertake fresh assessment. Accordingly, after issuing show cause notice the assessment order was passed. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed W.P.No.34090 of 2011. It was dismissed giving liberty to the petitioner to avail the effective alternative remedy by filing appeal before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner. The petitioner filed the appeal, and statedly deposited 12.5% of the disputed tax. The petitioner contends that even though everything is complied with, the appeal is not numbered. In the meanwhile, the first respondent issued penalty order dated 11.01.2012 imposing 100% penalty. This was also assailed by the petitioner before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner, and the application for stay was dismissed. Thereafter, the second respondent issued urgent arrear notice advising the petitioner to pay the demanded tax within three days and failure would result in initiating action under Section 80(1) of the Act. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed.
Counsel for the petitioner submits that as directed by this Court his client has availed alternative remedy, but the Appellate Deputy Commissioner did not number the appeal. Due to this, the penalty order was passed, and therefore, the action of the authority in not entertaining the appeal is arbitrary. He, however, does not dispute the fact that along with the appeal the petitioner has not enclosed the original copy of the assessment. In that view of the matter, we are of the considered opinion that even if the petitioner produced a certified copy after obtaining the same from the second respondent, the appeal may be numbered and his stay application may be taken up for consideration. If any adverse order is passed, it would be open to the petitioner to approach the Joint/Additional Commissioner under Section 31(3) of the Act. Insofar as the penalty proceedings are concerned, the petitioner’s
application for stay has already been dismissed on 23.02.2012, and if so advised, the petitioner may approach the revisional authority against the said order also. In this writ petition except making the observations as hereinabove, no relief can be granted, especially, when the petitioner has already availed the effective alternative remedy under the Act.
The Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed. The miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall also stand dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
_______________ (V.V.S.RAO, J)
________________________________ (G.KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY, J)
25.04.2012 vs
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the penalty proceedings can be quashed despite the petitioner failing to produce the original assessment copy.
Whether the writ petition can be entertained when the petitioner has availed the effective alternative remedy of appeal.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
M/s.Aditya Auto Engineers and Technicians.
Asst.Commissioner (CT), Audit, Saroor Nagar Division, Manoranjan Complex, M.J.Road, Nampally, Hyderabad
V.V.S.RAO
G.KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
