Allowed

M/s. Stackline System Private Limited, v. State of Telangana

Telangana HC21 Feb 2017WP/4768/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court, in a writ petition challenging an assessment order under the Telangana Value Added Tax Act, allowed the matter due to violation of natural justice and non-service of show-cause notice. The impugned order was set aside, and the case was remanded to the respondents for proper service and fresh proceedings.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is allowed; the impugned order is set aside and remitted; the bank attachment is lifted; the respondents shall serve the notice and conduct fresh proceedings.

M/s. Stackline System Private Limited, Vs State… — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2017)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN AND

¶2

THE HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE J. UMA DEVI

¶3

WRIT PETITION No. 4768 of 2017

¶4

ORDER: (Per VRS,J)

¶5

On the ground of violation of the principles of natural justice and also on the ground that an assessment was earlier completed by a superior officer, the Dealer under the Telangana Value Added Tax Act has come up with the present writ petition, challenging an order of assessment.

¶6

Heard Mr. P. Balaji Varma, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Mr. M. Govind Reddy, learned special standing counsel for Commercial Taxes (Telangana) appearing for the respondents.

¶7

The positive case of the petitioner is that none of the show-cause-notices nor even the order of assessment was ever served on them. From the records, it appears that there was little confusion in the office of the respondents in effecting proper service of notices upon the petitioner. Therefore, it is clear that the petitioner did not have adequate opportunity to file their objections to the show-causenotice and participate in the proceedings. On that ground, the Writ Petition is allowed, the impugned order is set aside, and the matter remitted back. The respondents shall serve a copy of the show-causenotice upon the petitioner to the address indicated in the certificate of registration by registered post/speed post, within fifteen (15) days. On

¶8

VRS,J & JUD,,J WP No.4768 of 2017

¶9

¶10

receipt of the copy of the show-cause-notice, the petitioner shall file their objections. Thereafter, the respondents shall fix a date of hearing, after intimation to the petitioner in advance. On the date so fixed, the petitioner shall appear and produce all the records. Thereafter, the respondents shall pass orders afresh, in accordance with law. In view of the setting aside of the impugned order of assessment, the bank attachment will automatically stand lifted.

¶11

Consequently, miscellaneous petitions if any pending in the writ petition shall stand dismissed. No order as to costs.

¶12

__________________________
V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN, J
______________
J. UMA DEVI, J.
21 st February, 2017
cbs

¶13

VRS,J & JUD,,J WP No.4768 of 2017

¶14

¶15

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN  AND

¶16

THE HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE J. UMA DEVI

¶17

Writ Petition No. 4768 of 2017

¶18

(allowed)

¶19

21^st February, 2017

¶20

cbs

M/s. Stackline System Private Limited, v. State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. Stackline System Private Limited, v. State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rayachoti Omeshnadh Vs Kaloji Narayana Rao University of Health Sciences

Gurajala Venkateswara Rao, S/o. Koteswara Rao, Vs Union of India, Rep. by its

Commissioner of Income tax-Ii, Vs Sri Aurobindo Impex and Company

M/s. Goel Plywood, D No. 27-12-60, Chetla Bazar Alibarg Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by Prl. Secretary

M/s. Bavirisetty Mallikarjuna Rao Vs The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer - I

M/s. Srujana Engineering Works Vs The Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise and Service Tax