9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (1) TMI 1191X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed a letter admitting that purchases of raw materials were not shown in the return, and requested to pass an order adding the incorporation value of 10 per cent on the purchase value. The letter belied the petitioner’s only contention that it was denied a personal hearing before the assessment order was passed. The assessment order did not suffer from any error much less a grave error apparent on the face of the record warranting issue of a writ of certiorari to quash the assessment order, writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed - Writ Petition No. 25221 of 2010 - - - Dated:- 19-1-2011 - V. V. S. Rao, Ramesh Ranganathan, JJ. S.R.R. Viswanath for the Petitioner P. Balaji Varma, Special Counsel for Commercial Taxes ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ceipts, to a tax of Rs. 22,54,392 under section 4(7)(a) of the VAT Act read with rule 17(1)(g) of the Rules. The petitioner submitted its explanation on May 13, 2010. The petitioner also asked for an opportunity of personal hearing. The second respondent, thereafter, undertook assessment and passed orders in form VAT 305, dated July 28, 2010 proposing to levy tax at four per cent on the turnover towards iron and steel for the period from April, 2007 to March, 2008 for the assessment year 2007-08. Assailing the same, the petitioner filed the instant writ petition for a writ of certiorari. The preliminary submissions were made on October 7, 2010. Having regard to the submissions noticed infra, this court directed the Special Counsel for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... any of the submissions made by the petitioner's counsel. As rightly contended by the respondents, the order of the second respondent, presumably under section 20(3) of the VAT Act read with rule 25(5) of the VAT Rules, is an appealable order. Section 31(1) of the VAT Act provides for an appeal against any order passed by the assessing authority to the Appellate Deputy Commissioner. The petitioner has not availed of the remedy. More often than not indeed with regular frequency VAT assessees are filing writ petitions before this court ignoring or intentionally by-passing the effective appeal/revision system provided under sections 31 and 33 of the VAT Act. Such a practice has been deprecated by the Supreme Court. If writ petiti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessees at their sweet will although the y are aware of the period of limitation, and the availability of remedy of appeal. In this case the impugned assessment order was passed on July 28, 2010 and, if he was aggrieved, the petitioner ought to have filed an appeal within a period of thirty days, i.e., on or before August 28, 2010. They did not do so. They filed the instant writ petition on October 5, 2010. This is after expiry of the period of limitation contemplated under section 31(1) of the VAT Act. On this ground alone, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. Was the petitioner denied the opportunity of personal hearing? Based on the authorization dated May 1, 2009 given by the Deputy Commissioner, the second respondent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... maintained for the year 2007-08. You have verified the same on verification C declaration forms issuing by us. You have noticed that we have purchased the raw material such as steel from outside the State and used in constructions works but we have not reported form 200 VAT returns which are liable to tax under the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2005. Kindly pass the order after adding the incorporation value at 10 per cent purchases value for the year 2007-08. The above letter belies the petitioner's only contention (that is seriously pressed before us) that they were denied a personal hearing before the assessment order was passed. The counsel for the petitioner, however, submits that the letter extracted hereinabove wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
