TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (2) TMI 1144
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tioner has questioned the order passed by the revisional authority, i.e., respondent No. 1, dated November 14, 2014, passed in RV No. LV(4)/29/2013, in exercise of powers under section 9C of the A. P. Entertainments Tax Act, 1939. The petitioner is a master cable operator and provides signals to subscribers through other cable operators. The petitioner has filed monthly returns in form VI(A) for different tax periods. It is the case of the petitioner that basing on the information furnished by the cable operators, he arrived at the number of connections and accordingly paid the entertainment tax. The Commercial Tax Officer, Brodipet Circle, Guntur, has initiated proceedings for assessing the tax alleging that the petitioner has not furnis....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y Commissioner (CT), Guntur, who has passed the common order dated December 20, 2010, in all the matters. In the final orders, the Appellate Deputy Commissioner has specifically recorded a finding that the assessing authority had not conducted any ground survey work regarding the actual number of connections held with the petitioner herein and further recorded that the assessing authority has not furnished to the petitioner, the reports available with him. Reliance is also placed on the judgment of this court in the case of ITC Limited, Sarapaka, Khammam Dist. v. Asst. Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, LTU Warangal [2009] 49 APSTJ 234 (AP). The ratio laid down in the said judgment is also extracted in the order of the Appellate Deputy Commiss....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... It is the further case of the petitioner that as orders are passed by the assessing authority without furnishing the material relied on for passing such orders and as the objections raised by the petitioner to the show-cause notice are also not considered by the assessing authority, there is no illegality or irregularity in the orders passed by the Appellate Deputy Commissioner so as to interfere with the said order in exercise of powers under section 9C of the Act. In support of his case, the petitioner has relied on the judgment of this court in NSL Krishnaveni Sugars Limited, Mahabubnagar v. Government of Telangana [2015] 4 VSTOL 364 (T and AP) ; [2014] 59 APSTJ 58 (AP). Counter-affidavit is filed on behalf of the first respondent-Add....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n such material, fresh assessment proceedings are initiated. On the aforesaid grounds, respondents sought to justify the orders passed by the revisional authority. Heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the material on record and relevant provisions under the A. P. Entertainments Tax Act, 1939. A perusal of the provision under section 9C of the A. P. Entertainments Tax Act, 1939 shows that revisional powers are specifically conferred on the Entertainments Tax Commissioner or the Entertainments Tax Joint Commissioner to suo motu call for and examine the record of any order passed or proceedings recorded by any authority, officer or person subordinate to him under the provisions of the said Act for the purpose of satisfying ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ts is in violation of the said judgment of this court, which amounts to denial of opportunity, has rightly set aside the order of the assessing authority and remanded the matter for fresh consideration. In view of the nature of the order passed by the Appellate Deputy Commissioner, it cannot be termed either as an illegal or irregular order. As the assessing authority has not furnished relevant material to the petitioner along with the show-cause notice and also not considered the objections raised by the petitioner in his explanation to such show-cause notice, the Appellate Deputy Commissioner has rightly set aside the order and remanded the matter for fresh consideration. In view of the specific provision under section 9C of the Act confe....