9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (7) TMI 585X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e lockdown imposed by the Central Government, he was operating from his Chennai office and not at Guntur office. At any rate, having regard to the submission of the petitioner that he is ready to produce forms F H to the satisfaction of the authorities, we deem it fit to grant an opportunity by following principles of natural justice. The impugned assessment order is set aside - the 1st respondent is directed to afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and to submit the relevant documents and consider the same and pass an appropriate order in accordance with the governing law - Petition allowed. - WRIT PETITION No.1930 of 2021 - - - Dated:- 27-1-2021 - HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE U. DURGA PRASAD RAO AND HON BLE MS. JUSTIC ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... titioner s firm namely the 3rd respondent had informed the petitioner that it has received a Garnishee Notice under Section 29 of the A.P. VAT Act, 2005. Thereupon, the petitioner approached the office of the 1st respondent on 24.11.2020 and accordingly, he was informed that the assessment order has been passed on 30.03.2020 and the same was sent by registered post to the address of the petitioner but the same was returned unserved on 01.07.2020. The petitioner s submission is that in view of the covid pandemic 19 lockdown, the petitioner has closed down its office at Guntur and has been operating from Chennai from September, 2020 onwards. Thereupon, the petitioner obtained a copy of the assessment order, passed by the 1st respondent o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mercial Tax representing on behalf of the respondents. 4. The main plank of argument of learned counsel for petitioner is that the impugned order was passed on 30.03.2020, during the period when covid pandemic-19 was rampant and the copy of the assessment order said to be sent by registered post was not received by him as by that time, due to covid lockdown, the petitioner has closed down his office at Guntur and has been operating from Chennai from September, 2020 onwards and in those unavoidable circumstances, unfortunately, he could not receive the assessment order. Learned counsel would further submit that the petitioner has a strong case as the tax liability of ₹4,15,35,972/- was fixed, because the petitioner could not submit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
