HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY WRIT PETITION No. 3570 of 2014 Dated: 16.04.2014 Between:
M/s.OSPS Telecom Services Private Limited, Rep. by its General Manager, Mr. Ateeq Ahmed And Commercial Tax Officer, Mehdipatnam Circle, Charminar Division, Hyderabad and two others.
…..Petitioner ....Respondents The Court made the following :
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY WRIT PETITION No. 3570 of 2014 ORDER : (per Hon'ble Sri Justice Ashutosh Mohunta) The petitioner filed this writ petition challenging the order dated 20.12.2013 passed by the 1st respondent for the tax period from April, 2009 to March, 2010.
2. It is the case of the petitioner that the impugned order was passed by the 1st respondent in violation of principles of natural justice. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the reply was filed by the petitioner on 09.05.2011 enclosing certain documents in support of his objections. However, neither the documents nor the objections were considered while passing the impugned, as is clear from the impugned order. He further submits that the 1st respondent does not have the jurisdiction to pass fresh order as there is no fresh material, but can pass re-assessment order. However, the re-assessment sought to be done by the 1st respondent is also barred by limitation.
3. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the copy of the objections stated to have been filed by the petitioner was not available on file and hence they were not considered.
4. After going through the impugned order and going through the averments in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, we find that without considering the objections, dated 09.05.2011, filed by the petitioner, the 1st respondent passed the impugned order. Therefore, the impugned order dated 20.12.2013 is liable to be set aside.
5. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of setting aside the impugned order and remanding the matter to the 1st respondent for taking a decision afresh taking into consideration the objections filed by the petitioner on 09.05.2011 along with the documents and affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The petitioner is at liberty to raise all the points as raised in this writ petition before the 1st respondent. No order as to costs.
6. As a sequel, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.
ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY, J 16th April 2014. mar