Deemed registration applies where time-bound sales tax registration procedure is not properly followed

Registration applications under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act and Rules must be processed within the prescribed time by summary enquiry, issue of certificate, or a valid notice for further enquiry or rejection. A notice that does not amount to a proper notice of further enquiry, does not fix an enquiry date, and is not followed by prompt action cannot defeat deemed registration under rule 28(10)(c). Any demand for security must also comply with section 12(7) and section 12(11), including a written order and hearing. The statutory scheme therefore protects prompt, non-arbitrary disposal of registration applications and supports deemed registration where procedure is not followed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the applicant was entitled to be treated as deemed registered under rule 28(10)(c) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Rules, 1957, and whether the registering authority could insist upon further objections and security without complying with the statutory time limits and procedure.

Analysis: Section 12 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 and rule 28 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Rules, 1957 require a registration application to be dealt with expeditiously. The statutory scheme contemplates a summary enquiry, issue of certificate within 30 days if the application is in order, or issuance within that period of a notice of further enquiry or a notice to show cause against rejection. A notice that does not itself constitute a notice of further enquiry, does not fix a date for enquiry, and is not followed by prompt action cannot defeat the statutory safeguard of deemed registration. The demand for security must also conform to the requirements of section 12(7) and section 12(11), including a written order and opportunity of being heard. The right to carry on business under Article 19(1)(g) reinforces the need for prompt and non-arbitrary disposal of registration applications.

Conclusion: The applicant was held entitled to deemed registration under rule 28(10)(c), and the authority's delay and procedural course were found insufficient to deny registration.

Final Conclusion: The registration application was required to be treated as having been granted by operation of law, and the respondents were bound to issue the registration certificates under the State Act and the Central Act.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the registration statute prescribes a time-bound summary procedure and protects the applicant by a deemed-registration clause, the authority must either complete the enquiry and issue the certificate, or validly invoke the statutory notice mechanism within time; a delayed or insubstantial notice without prompt follow-up cannot defeat deemed registration.

---