9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (1) TMI 61X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ER: (PER SRI JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO) In this Writ Petition, the petitioner has assailed the Assessment Order AO No.51883 dt.31.03.2020 passed by the 1st respondent for the assessment year 2015-16 under Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 which has been served on the petitioner on 29.05.2020. 2. The petitioner is a private limited company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956. It is engaged in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. 49,58,26,358/- represents inter-State sales of mobile phones at the local VAT rate of tax of 5%. 5. In support of its objections, the petitioner enclosed CST invoices, copies of local sale invoices for ready reference and requested the 1st respondent to levy tax at 5%. 6. But the 1st respondent passed the impugned Assessment Order on 31.03.2020 without considering the specific contention rais ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g the provisions of the Telangana VAT Act, 2005 and would be liable for forfeiture under Section 57 of the said Act in addition to prosecution. 8. In addition to the above contentions, counsel for the petitioner contended that the Assessment Order passed by the 1st respondent is also barred by limitation for the tax period July, 2015 to January, 2016 as per Sub-rule 5A of Rule 14A of the CST (Tel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... since he had omitted to consider the same while passing the impugned Assessment Order. 11. Counsel for the petitioner also requested that the matter be remitted back to the 1st respondent for fresh consideration and that the petitioner be permitted to raise not only the issue about the rate of tax but also the issue of time bar of assessment for the period July, 2015 to January, 2016. 12. In vi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
