Allowed

M/s. New Consolidated Constructions Company Limited, v. Assistant Commissioner (Ct) Vmu-Ii

Telangana HC19 Oct 2012WP/32708/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged an assessment order issued under a composite authorization allowing audit and assessment powers. The Single Judge quashed the order, following a prior precedent, and allowed the petitioner to benefit from the invalid proceedings.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order of Assessment dated 21-9-2012 is quashed. The duly authorized and competent authority is at liberty to pass a fresh order of Assessment in accordance with law.

M/s. New Consolidated Constructions Company Limited… — GST and Indirect Tax | Telangana HC (2012)

¶1

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM

¶2

AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO

¶3

Writ Petition No. 32708 of 2012

¶4

Dated: 19-10-2012

¶5

Between:

¶6

M/s New Consolidated Constructions Company Ltd. rep. by its General Manager-Projects L.N.Pathan.

¶7

…Petitioner And

¶8

Assistant Commissioner (CT) VMU-II Secunderabad Division and another.

¶9

…Respondents.

¶10

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO

¶11

Writ Petition No. 32708 of 2012

¶12

Oral order (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Goda Raghuram)

¶13

The order of Assessment dated 21-9-2012 passed by the 1^st respondent in Form VAT-305 for the years 2010-11 and 2011-12 is assailed in this writ petition inter alia on the ground that a composite authorization was granted to the 1^st respondent to conduct audit of the petitioner’s business as well as for making an assessment; that such composite authorization is invalid in view of the decision of this Court i n Dekars Fires and Security Systems Pvt. Ltd. v. The Deputy Commissioner (CT), Secunderabad Division and others^[1] , which decision following the earlier decision in Sri Balaji Flour Mills, Chittor v. The Commercial Tax Officer-II, Chittoo r^[2] held that a composite authorization would not legitimize passing an order of Assessment if there is no separate authorization for Assessment, issued under Rule 59 of the Andhra Pradesh VAT Rules, 2005.

¶14

The learned Special Govt. Pleader for Commercial Taxes Sri Venkatadri fairly concedes the factual position that the impugned order of Assessment was passed by the 1^st respondent pursuant to a composite authorization granted to the said respondent both for audit as well as for assessment.

¶15

In the light of the submission on behalf of the respondent and following the judgment of this Court in Dekars’s case, the impugned

¶16

order of Assessment dated 21-9-2012 passed by the 1^st respondent is quashed. The duly authorized and competent authority is however at liberty to pass a fresh order of Assessment in accordance with law.

¶17

The writ petition is accordingly allowed. No costs.

¶18

_________________________ GODA RAGHURAM, J

¶19

19^th October, 2012

¶20

_______________________________ M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO, J

¶21

GRR

¶22

[1] (2011) 53 APSTJ 45