AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
R. Subhash Reddy, J.—In view of the stand taken by the respondents in the counter affidavit, the matter has been heard at the stage of admission and is being disposed of. The Writ Petition is filed questioning the assessment proceedings, dated 09.04.2014, issued in AAO. ORDER: 32751/09-04-2014 by respondent No. 1, by which, the petitioner was directed to remit the balance tax/under-declared tax of Rs. 35,62,58,360/- within 30 days from the date of receipt of that order.
It is the case of the petitioner that she is the sole proprietrix of M/s. Satyam Traders, a registered dealer under the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2005 on the rolls of Commercial Tax Officer, Afzalgunj Circle, with TIN No. 28605196529, dealing in imitation jewellery, in a shop admeasuring 150 Square Feet. In the year 2008-09, she did business only with regard to Women''s knickknacks and during the years 2008-09 to 2012-13, she has not taken any way bills, ''C'' forms, ''F'' forms or ''H'' forms. The sales turn over for the said periods are as under:
It is the grievance of the petitioner that, without giving her any opportunity, based on some material alleged to have been found with M/s. Lotus Refineries Private Limited (formerly Lotus Pharma Chem. Private Limited) and M/s. India Infoline Commodity Limited, the impugned proceedings, dated 09.04.2014, was issued.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for petitioner that petitioner never had any dealings with the aforesaid dealers and without there being any basis, respondent No. 1 has issued the impugned proceedings.
Counter affidavit is filed by respondent No. 1 denying the various allegations made by the petitioner. It is stated that M/s. Satyam Traders is a registered dealer on the rolls of Commercial Tax Officer, Afzalgunz Circle, dealing in the business of kundans, boarder laces, threads, zaris, beads and imitation jewellery. Based on the authorisation, dated 01.11.2012, given by the Deputy Commissioner (Commercial Taxes), Charminar Division, he has visited the premises of the petitioner and requested her to produce the books of accounts, but she requested some time to produce the same and as she did not turn up, he issued notices in FORM VAT 310 on 17.11.2012 and 31.12.2012 requiring the petitioner to produce the books. In response thereto, the petitioner filed letters, dated 04.01.2013 and 04.02.2013, requesting some more time to produce the same. After repeated notices, petitioner produced the statements of purchase and sale for the period 2008-09 to 2012-13 (up to Nov., 2012). In the meanwhile, the Commercial Tax Officer, Afzalgunj, respondent No. 2, received mail from Commercial Tax Officers, Malkajgiri and S.D. Road Circle, requesting him to verify some invoices issued by the petitioner to M/s. Lotus Refineries Private Limited and M/s. India Infoline Commodity Limited, and hence, the said letters and the material was sent to him for verification. After verifying the same, as it was noticed that the said invoices were not accounted so far, a notice in FORM VAT 305A, dated 16.12.2013, was issued proposing to assess the petitioner on the concealed turnover. The petitioner filed a letter, dated 28.12.2013, stating that she has no dealings with the aforesaid dealers and requested 20 days time for collecting the details of the said dealers. Thereafter, on 25.02.2014, the petitioner filed a letter requesting to pass necessary orders after verifying the bank statements. As the petitioner did not request for supply of any material or for personal hearing, based on the material sent by the Commercial Tax Officers of Malkajgiri and S.D. Road Circle, the impugned proceedings, dated 09.04.2014, was issued.
It is clear from the stand taken by the respondents in the counter that the impugned assessment proceedings, dated 09.04.2014, was issued pursuant to the mail sent by the Commercial Tax Officers, Malkajgiri and S.D. Road Circle, with regard to some invoices stated to have been issued by the petitioner to M/s. Lotus Refineries Private Limited and to M/s. India Infoline Commodity Limited. Except the said invoices, there is no other material for assessment. When it is the specific case of the petitioner that she has no dealings with the dealers referred to above, the respondents ought to have supplied the material to the petitioner before taking up further proceedings and issuing the impugned assessment proceedings, dated 09.04.2014.
As it is not in dispute that the invoices stated to have been collected from the aforesaid dealers are not supplied to the petitioner and as the petitioner is denying supply of such invoices, without going into the merits of the case, we deem it appropriate to set aside the impugned assessment proceedings, dated 09.04.2014, and remit the matter to the Commercial Tax Officer, Charminar Division, Hyderabad, to consider the matter afresh by furnishing the material, based on which the impugned assessment proceedings, dated 09.04.2014, was issued and by giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and to pass appropriate orders. Subject to the above, the Writ Petition is allowed. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. No costs.