Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases VAT and Sales Tax VAT and Sales Tax + HC VAT and Sales Tax - 2007 (9) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2007 (9) TMI 565 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Issues involved: Challenge to an order imposing interest u/s Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 due to lack of communication to the petitioner.

Issue 1: Communication of order

The writ petition challenged an order dated August 1, 2005, imposing interest under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957, on the grounds of lack of communication to the petitioner. The counter filed stated that the order was dispatched to the petitioner by ordinary post on September 30, 2005. The controversy centered around whether service by ordinary post constituted valid service as per the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Rules, 1957.

Issue 2: Relevant rule for service

Rule 58 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Rules was deemed relevant in determining the validity of service. The rule outlined various methods of service, including giving or tendering to the dealer or his representative, sending by registered post, or affixing at the last known place of business or residence if other modes were impractical. Notably, there was no provision for service by ordinary post under this rule.

Judgment

The court held that service by ordinary post did not meet the requirements of Rule 58, and thus, the order could not be presumed as validly served on the dealer. As the petitioner was not informed of the order and was not granted a hearing before its issuance, the court set aside the order dated August 1, 2005. The authority was directed to provide a hearing to the petitioner and issue fresh orders in compliance with the law, allowing the petitioner to raise their contentions before the authority. No costs were awarded in this matter.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates