TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (12) TMI 272
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....al, contrary to law and against the principles of natural justice and consequently to set aside the same. The petitioner company which is a proprietary concern carrying on business in pulses, dalls, vegetable oils and vanaspathi, is a registered dealer on the rolls of the second respondent under the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (for short, the VAT Act). The first respondent issued a notice dated 18.2.2012, stating that the inspection of the petitioner's books would be held on 01.3.2012, and the petitioner directed to furnish the books of accounts for the period from 01.4.2005 to 01.3.2012. It is pleaded in the writ petition that in pursuance of the notice dated 18.02.2012, the petitioner's part time accountant by n....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ounter-affidavit filed by the respondent No.1, it is contended at the outset that the petitioner has got efficacious alternative remedy of appeal under the provisions of the VAT Act to challenge the orders passed by the first respondent and that the petitioner, without availing the remedy of appeal provided under the statute, cannot straightaway invoke the jurisdiction of this court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It is explained in the counter-affidavit that based on the authorisation issued by the Deputy Commissioner, Nellore, the first respondent visited the business premises of the petitioner and requested the accountant of the petitioner, who is present at that time to produce its books for verification. The accountant ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and Sri P.Balaji Varma, learned Special Standing Counsel for the respondents. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there was no valid service of notice as provided under Rule 64 of the VAT Rules and therefore the impugned order of assessment is vitiated. In support of his submission, the learned counsel relied upon the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in M.Adinarayana v CTO, Piduguralla1 wherein it was held that service of notice of assessment should be in conformity with Rule 64 of the VAT Rules, as otherwise the order of assessment thereon is violative of procedure prescribed and vitiates for not providing opportunity of hearing. Rule 64 of A.P. VAT Rules which provides for mode of service of orde....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dress is described as "D.No.37/87/1, Gajulapalem, Addanki Village & Mandal". Along with the counter-affidavit filed by the respondent No.1, the photocopies of the returned envelopes sent by registered post were enclosed and a perusal of the same reveals the following factual aspects: Sl. No. Notice/ order Address written Remarks 1. Notice dated 18.2.2012 requesting the petitioner to produce books of accounts. Sri Venkateswara Trading Co., D.No.37/87/1, Prop: Kothamasu Kasi Vis...,S/o.Subbaiah, Gajulapalem, Addanki V & M, Prakasam District, C/o.D.No.1-42, Main Road, Addanki, Prakasam (Dt.) "Refused. Returned to sender" 2. Notice dated 25.7.2012 reminder for production of books of accounts and toappear on 02.8.20....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... and until the contrary is proved by the addressee, service of notice is deemed to have been effected at the time at which the letter would have been delivered in the ordinary course of business. This Court has already held that when a notice is sent by registered post and is returned with a postal endorsement "refused" or "not available in the house" or "house locked" or "shop closed" or "addressee not in station", due service has to be presumed. In the light of the settled legal position and having regard to the facts and circumstances noticed above, we are of the considered view that the first respondent strictly adhered to the procedure contemplated under Rule 64 of the VAT Rules before passing the impugned assessment order. The deci....