APHC010477482010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3529] MONDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 6865/2010 Between: 1. M/S. S.C. PULLAIAH, PRODDATUR, S/O. COTTON MERCHANTS 7/1400, KORRAPAD ROAD, PRODDATUR REP.BY ITS PARTNER SRI S.C. PULLAIAH ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE DY COMMISSIONER CT ANOTHER, OPP. Y.S.R. GUEST HOUSE, SMITH ROAD, KADAPA 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER CT LTU KADAPA, OPP. Y.S.R. GUEST HOUSE, SMITH ROAD, KADAPA ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased toissue an appropriate writ order or direction more particularly in the nature of Mandamus declaring the action of First Respondent in passing the impugned Revision Order in Asst. No. NIL/2004-2005 (CST) dt. 29-10-2009 (Served on 27-1-2010) revising the Assessment Order of the Second Respondent for the Assessment Year 2004-2005 CST without giving the petitioner an opportunity of personal hearing even though specifically sought for by the petitioner as violative of the principles of natural justice apart from being contrary to law and facts and contrary to the judgments of this Hon'ble 2 RRR,J & TCDS,J W.P.No.6865 of 2010 High Court in 41 APSTJ 6 (AP) 45, APSTJ 166 (AP) and WP. 10123 of 2008 dt. 25-6-2008 and consequently set aside the same and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2010(WPMP 8865 OF 2010 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant stay of collection of the dipsuted tax 3,45,605-00 for the Assessment year 2004-2005 CST and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. G NARENDRA CHETTY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX 3 RRR,J & TCDS,J W.P.No.6865 of 2010 The Court made the following Order: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) The assessment of the petitioner, for the assessment year, 2004-2005, under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, was completed, by an order of assessment, dated 01.12.2006. Thereafter, the Deputy Commissioner, Kadapa, initiated revisional proceedings, by way of a notice, dated 23.12.2008. The petitioner responded to the said show-cause notice, by objections, dated 17.03.2009. In the said objections statement, the petitioner had also sought a personal hearing, to explain the case better. 2. The Revisional Authority, after receiving the said statement of objections, and after considering the same, had passed an Order, dated 29.10.2009, bringing to tax, a turnover of Rs.86,40,132/- at the rate of 4%. 3. Aggrieved by this Order of Revision, the petitioner has approached this Court, by way of the present Writ Petition. 4. Sri G. Narendra Chetty, the learned counsel for the petitioner, would assail the order of revision, both on merits as well as on the grounds of violation of Principles of Natural Justice. 5. This Court does not propose to go into the merits of the case as the contentions raised, in this regard, are questions of fact, which this Court does not intend to go into, while exercising its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner, in its statement of objections, dated 17.03.2009, had requested for a personal hearing. However, the Revisional 4 RRR,J & TCDS,J W.P.No.6865 of 2010 Authority does not appear to have considered this request and had passed orders, on an appreciation of the objections, raised by the petitioner. 6. The learned Government Pleader for Commercial Taxes appearing for the respondents, would contend that, there is no provision, under the A.P.V.A.T. Act or the C.S.T. Act, to provide a personal hearing, under the said Acts or to give an opportunity to the dealer to make out a case, by way of filing the written objections and the material in support of the said objections. 7. The learned Government Pleader would submit that, the action taken by the Revisional Authority to give an opportunity to the petitioner to set out its objections, is sufficient compliance of the requirements of Principles of Natural Justice. 8. The learned Government Pleader would also contend that, in such circumstances, there is no violation of the Principles of Natural Justice or any of the requirements of the A.P.V.A.T. Act or the C.S.T. Act. Though, this Court is in agreement with the submissions made by the learned Government Pleader, the fact remains that the petitioner had sought further hearing and the Revisional Authority had not considered such a request. 9. In these circumstances, it would only be appropriate to hold that there has been violation of Principles of Natural Justice, requiring this Court to set aside the Order of Revision, dated 29.10.2009 and to remand the matter back 5 RRR,J & TCDS,J W.P.No.6865 of 2010 to the Revisional Authority, for giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and to pass necessary orders thereafter. 10. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is allowed and the Order of Revision, dated 29.10.2009, is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Revisional Authority to pass fresh orders, after giving an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner. 11. Needless to say, the period of limitation, from the date of passing of the order till the date of receipt of this order, shall be excluded. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________ R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J _________________ T.C.D. SEKHAR, J Date:09.02.2026 KPV 6 RRR,J & TCDS,J W.P.No.6865 of 2010 401 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION No.6865 of 2010 (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) 09.02.2026 KPV