9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (6) TMI 631X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the contention of the petitioner. Therefore, in those circumstances, the petitioner who was provided with user ID and password and maintaining privacy of the account as per the norms affixed by the Central Government, the petitioner cannot be exonerated from liability to pay tax on the turnover covered by E-way bills which was generated by the petitioner. Therefore, we find no ground to exercise judicial discretion to grant any relief in this writ petition. - Writ petition dismissed. - WRIT PETITION No.318 OF 2016 - - - Dated:- 29-4-2016 - SRI RAMESH RANGANATHAN AND SRI M. SATYANARAYANA MURTH, JJ. FOR THE PETITIONER : VISHNUVARDHANA REDDY FOR THE RESPONDENT : SURIBABU S(SPL SC FOR CT AP) ORDER : ( Per Hon ble Sri Justice M. Satyanarayana Murthy) The petitioner filed this writ petition to declare that the Assessment Order No.43116, dated 27.11.2015, passed by the first respondent, for the period from 01.01.2015 to 09.06.2015 under the provisions of Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax, 2005 (for short, AP VAT ACT, 2005) is without jurisdiction, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice. 02. The petitioner is a registered dealer on the rolls of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6 E-way bills, admitted about generation of 2 E-way bills and requested to postpone passing of Assessment Order. But the first respondent without granting sufficient time and without considering reply to the show cause notice, ignoring the complaint and remand report, passed the impugned assessment order dated 27.11.2015 in over haste and that the said Assessment Order is illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice, since the first respondent passed the said order without conducting inquiry into the actual generation of E-way bills. Hence, prayed for the aforesaid reliefs. 05. The respondents filed counter affidavit denying the material allegations, while admitting about issue of show cause notice, receipt of reply to the show cause notice, passing of Assessment Order dated 27.11.2015, assessing the petitioner to tax. It is specifically contended that one Smt. Vem Bhadramma, D/o.Sri Venkata Reddy Terati, residing at D.No.1/102, Theegalaveni Village, Gudur Mandal, Warangal District, Telangana State, obtained registration under the AP VAT Act, 2005 and CST Act, 1956, authorized by Sri Penna Srinivasulu, S/o. Peddanagaiah and obtained TIN No.37651122143 with e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 9.05.2015 and when the petitioner made an attempt to download another E-way bill on 08.06.2015, they encountered the same problem and the petitioner s account was not opened. Thus, the allegations made in the FIR are totally in variance with the allegations made in the writ petition and that the person to whom user ID and password are provided alone can access the account of the petitioner, and he himself responsible for such accessing to the account of the petitioner and generating bills. Again when the account of the petitioner was not opened on 08.06.2015 when the petitioner tried to generate another E-way bill, the petitioner again reset the password for generation of E-way bills. On 19.05.2015 they download E-way bill No.371505192579391. It is again noticed on 09.06.2015 the account of the petitioner was not open when the petitioner tried to download E-way bill, again reset the password for second time and generated E-way bill No.371506099158194. It is the contention of the petitioner that when they tried to generate E-way bill on 19.05.2015 the account was not getting opened, but the petitioner filed its monthly return for the month of April, 2015 on 19.05.2015. It is evident ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ird party, made the petitioner liable to pay taxes to the first respondent and even did not defer passing of the Assessment Order till completion of the investigation in the case, and prayed to set aside the same. 12. Per contra, Sri S. Suri Babu, learned standing counsel for the Commercial Taxes, contended that the petitioner logged to the account of the petitioner and generated 105 E way bills, evidencing purchase of ceramic tiles and machinery etc., amounting to ₹ 96,16,638/-, but in the returns, the petitioner did not disclose generation of any E-way bills under AP VAT Act, 2005 or under CST Act, 1956, admitted generation of 2 CST Eway bills utilized for the purpose of transporting machinery from Rajasthan to install the same in the factory premises. 13. When the petitioner accessed or logged to the account for generating CST E-way bills, immediately the account disclose the number of E-way bills generated by the petitioner, but conveniently did not report about the alleged hacking and generation of E-way bills by the third parties, this itself indicates that the allegations made in the writ petition are prima facie false. Therefore, the petitioners are liable to pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se may be, is effected by means of such electronic form as may be prescribed by the appropriate Government. 2) T he appropriate Government may, for the purpose of such-section (1), by rules, prescribea) the manner and format in which such electronic records shall be filed, created or issued: b) the manner or method of payment of any fee or charges for filing, creating or issue any electronic record under clause (a). 16. Thus, in view of specific provision of AP VAT Act, 2005, facility of generating E-way bills was provided under Section 6 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and such record is to be accepted. Section 16 of the said Act, obligates the Central Government for the purpose of Section 14 and 15 (Secure Electronic Record and Secure Electronic Signature) prescribe procedure and practice. Accordingly necessary security procedures were provided to the Commercial Taxes Website providing user ID and password to the account holder. If for any reason, the third party hacked the website, accessed to the account of the petitioner, such person is liable for punishment under Section 66(c), 66(e) and (f) of the Information Technology Act, 2000, but the petitioner cannot ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8 CST371505214231676 21.05.2015 430848 9 CST371505217780620 21.05.2015 433296 10 CST371505281211396 28.05.2015 414202 11 CST371505289067293 28.05.2015 421056 12 CST371505289668207 28.05.2015 416160 13 CST371506066109538 06.06.2015 93024 14 CST371506067721884 06.06.2015 146880 15 CST371505192579391 19.05.2015 2550000 Machinery 16 CST371506099158194 09.06.2015 5250 Granite Machinery Trolley Track Total purchase ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for hacking account of the petitioner, generating of E-way bills, but the first respondent is not under obligation to wait till completion of criminal proceedings. Even otherwise, the petitioner admittedly generated two CST E-way bills on 19.05.2015 and 09.06.2015, the petitioner would have disclosed the said fact in VAT form 200 filed through online, but surprisingly filed NIL turn over return. Therefore, the petitioner conveniently suppressed, even generating two CST Eway bills referred above on 19.05.2015 and 09.06.2015 for ₹ 25,55,250/-, in the turnover. Originally manual way bill are accepted but to plug in lope holes in Manual system and to avoid loss of revenue the Commercial Sales Tax Department by exercising power under Section 77 and 78 of AP VAT Act issued circular regarding issue of E-way bills, making it mandatory to transact business by any VAT or TOT dealer. The petitioner did not dispute transacting business by E-way bills and admitted about generating CST E-way bills from the AP Sales Tax Department web portal, but pleaded ignorance about misusing way bill till receipt of notice. When user ID and password are provided to the dealer, dealer alone is expected t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
