9911796707
TMI Blog1994 (1) TMI 262X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be adjusted towards tax for the year 1991-92. The assessment for the year 1991-92 was completed on October 12, 1993 without adjusting the refund resulting in demand of Rs. 2.40 lakhs. Petitioner has disputed the said amount and filed an appeal. He also wrote a letter requesting the first respondent that the demand for 1991-92 was wrong since an amount of Rs. 6,09,778.53 was due to him according to form "C" refund order. Apparently after receiving the above letter, the first respondent issued a notice dated December 28, 1993 requiring the petitioner to produce books of account for the year 1987-88 under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, xerox copies of the final assessment order and form "C" refund order alone with the payment deta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iven notice to the dealer of his intention to do so and has allowed him a reasonable opportunity of being heard." We understand the effect of the impugned order to enhance the assessment so as to wipe away more than Rs. 6,00,000 which was paid as excess tax. We are of the opinion that counsel for the petitioner is right in insisting that he ought to have been issued a notice proposing rectification in terms of rule 50 and the first respondent ought to have allowed him a reasonable opportunity of being heard in support of submissions which he would have made in reply to the show cause notice. We do not understand the notice dated December 28, 1993, to be a show cause notice which complies with the requirements of the proviso to rule 50 of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urther delay in the matter the order dated January 4, 1994 may be treated as notice requiring the petitioner to show cause against a proposal to rectify the mistake in the assessment order for the year 1987-88 so as to reduce the amount of refund due to the petitioner by enhancing the assessment as also for the purpose of ordering, forfeiture of excess amount which is alleged to have been collected towards tax or amount collected towards tax in contravention of the provisions of the Act. Treating the above order as a notice for these twin purposes, the petitioner shall submit his explanation within a period not exceeding two weeks from today. The first respondent may pass appropriate orders strictly in compliance of the statute. He shall do ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
