9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (1) TMI 310X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tioner is challenging the Assessment Order A.O.No.49657 dt.30.03.2020 passed by the 3rd respondent for the period 2015-16 under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. 2. The petitioner contends that the 3rd respondent had issued notices on 26.08.2019 and 19.11.2019, and a Final Notice dt.07.03.2020 through e-mail to petitioner; and that such a mode of service is not contemplated in Rule 64(1)(b) of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... also freezed the bank account of petitioner without serving any Garnishee Notice on petitioner, and that this is illegal. 5. Sri M. Govind Reddy, learned Special Counsel for Commercial Taxes, appearing for respondents, does not dispute that Rule 64(1) (b) of the Telangana VAT, 2005 which is applicable does not contemplate service of notices through e-mail on an assessee. He also does not dispute ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e date of receipt of copy of the said notice to file objections thereto along with supporting material; the 3rd respondent shall afford a personal hearing to petitioner; and then a reasoned order shall be passed by 3rd respondent in accordance with law and communicate it to petitioner. 8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed as above. No order as to costs. 9. As a sequel, miscellaneous appl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
