Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2024 (7) TMI 1114

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ? - HELD THAT:- The period for passing the assessment order for the year 2015-2016 ended on 31.03.2020. The petitioner, which is a large Multi-National Company, cannot plead ignorance of the law or that the petitioner is awaiting an order despite the fact that the period for completing assessment had lapsed. Further, the contention, that the petitioner was under the impression that no demand was raised against the petitioner, cannot be accepted as such a conclusion could have been drawn only if an assessment order had been passed and served on the petitioner. The fact that the first step taken by the petitioner for the purpose of filing was only in June, 2022 when an application was made for a certified copy of the assessment order also mil .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... even Hundred and Seventy Six Only) to the taxable turn-over and raised a demand of Rs.1,77,83,641/- (Rupees One Crore Seventy Seven Lakhs Eighty Three Thousand Six Hundred and Forty One Only), by way of an assessment order dated 28.12.2019. This order is said to have been sent to the e-mail ID of the petitioner. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that this e-mail order was not received by the petitioner, in as much as the e-mail ID to which the order had been sent, had become inactive and was not being used by the petitioner. It is further submitted that the officer who was operating the said e-mail ID had left the service of the petitioner and as such the petitioner was unaware of any order being sent to the said e-mail ID. 3. It is also .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of the First Appeal or before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal at the stage of the Second Appeal and the same is permitted by virtue of the Judgment of Hon ble Division Bench of the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh reported in Godrej Agrovet Limited Vs. Commercial Tax Officer, Eluru, West Godavari District (2007) 7 VST 730 (AP). The petitioner contends that this right of the petitioner has been taken away on account of non-furnishing of the certified copy of the order required for filing the appeal. It is further contended that Rule 64 of the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Rules, 2005 (for short, the Rules ) which would be applicable to the assessments under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 also, did not provide for service of notice .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n 29.12.2019 and served through e-mail in June, 2020. The petitioner contends that the service of the order by e-mail is not proper service and in any event cannot be taken to have been served on the petitioner as the officer of the petitioner who was handling the e-mail ID had left the service of the petitioner and the e-mail ID had become inactive. In such circumstances, the petitioner contends that there should be a direction to the 1st respondent-Assessing Officer to serve the certified copy of the order of assessment dated 29.12.2019 and to permit the petitioner to file an appeal which would enable the petitioner to produce his F Form before the Appellate Authority. 9. Sri Srinivasa Rao Kudupudi, learned counsel for petitioner would al .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... passed and served on the petitioner. The fact that the first step taken by the petitioner for the purpose of filing was only in June, 2022 when an application was made for a certified copy of the assessment order also militates against the version set up by the petitioner. 12. The arguments that the service of the order by e-mail would not be proper service under Rule 64 of the Rules does not stand in view of the amendment to the said Rule. Further, the contention that service on the e-mail ID of the petitioner would not amount to proper service as the e-mail ID was inactive also cannot be accepted as it would be the duty of the petitioner to inform the Assessing Officer of any change in the e-mail ID. 13. In the circumstances. We do not fi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates