TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Invalid Revisional Order Quashed for Procedural Errors</h1> <h3>Kanaka Durga Wines, Guntur Versus Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Hyderabad</h3> The Court found the revisional order by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes invalid due to discrepancies in the service of notices, violating natural ... - Issues:1. Validity of revisional order passed by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes.2. Compliance with principles of natural justice and Rule 58 of the A.P. General Sales Tax Rules.Issue 1: Validity of revisional order passed by the Commissioner of Commercial TaxesThe appellant, a wine dealer, was assessed for the year 1992-93 under the A.P.G.S.T. Act 1957. The Appellate Deputy Commissioner allowed an appeal based on a Supreme Court decision, reducing the tax on the value of bottles and cartons. However, the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes set aside this decision, stating that liquor sales with bottles and cartons should be assessed at a higher rate. The appellant challenged the revisional order, questioning its conformity with natural justice principles and Rule 58 of the Rules. The Court examined the service of notices and found discrepancies. The Court noted that the second show cause notice proposing a significant tax revision was not properly served, violating natural justice principles and Rule 58. Consequently, the revisional order by the Commissioner was deemed invalid.Issue 2: Compliance with principles of natural justice and Rule 58 of the A.P. General Sales Tax RulesThe Court analyzed Rule 58 of the Rules, which specifies modes of service for notices. It highlighted that service by affixture (Clause d) can only be used if other modes (Clauses a to c) are impracticable. The Court questioned the Department's satisfaction regarding the impracticability of other modes before resorting to affixture. The Department failed to demonstrate such satisfaction, rendering the use of affixture invalid. Additionally, the Court found that the Department did not adequately serve the second show cause notice to the appellant or their counsel, as required by Rule 58. This failure to follow proper service procedures led to a violation of natural justice principles and Rule 58. Consequently, the Court set aside the revisional order and directed a fresh disposal of proceedings, emphasizing the importance of providing the appellant with a reasonable opportunity to present their objections.This judgment underscores the significance of adhering to procedural requirements, ensuring fair treatment and opportunities for parties involved in tax assessments. It emphasizes the need for proper service of notices and compliance with legal rules to uphold principles of natural justice in administrative proceedings.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
