AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (1) TMI 176
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....kata Suresh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, appearing through Virtual Mode and Sri Shreyas Reddy, learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax for the respondents. 2. This Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed challenging the impugned assessment orders dated 31.01.2022 and the order of penalty dated 30.03.2022. 3. Preliminary objection has been raised by the learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax that the petitioner has equally efficacious alternative remedy of Appeal to challenge the impugned orders under the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (in short, APVAT Act), and in view thereof the writ petition deserves not to be entertained. 4. Learned counsel for the petitio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., personal hearing notice-II dated 19.02.2022, and personal hearing notice-III dated 28.02.2022 were also issued but the dealer did not turn up and accordingly the order imposing the penalty was also passed. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the copy marked to him was not served on him and about the notices mentioned in the impugned orders, the petitioner was not aware. 8. The respondents have filed the counter affidavit and learned Government Pleader submitted that in the counter affidavit specific stand is that as per the records available, all the notices and orders were served on the petitioner with valid mode of service. In this respect, Para 5 of the counter has been referred, which also gives a table with respe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Personal hearing Notice-III dated 28.02.2022 for Penalty SCN By e.mail on 03.03.2022 12 Personal hearing Notice-I dated 16.03.2022 for Penalty SCN By Ordinary Post and by e.mail on 16.03.2022 13 Penalty Orders in VAT-203 Dated 30.03.2022 By Regd. Post on 31.03.2022 vide No. RN674753446IN e.mail on 31.03.2022 The mode of service and date of mode indicated in the above table clearly depicts that all the notices and orders were served on the petitioner by post as well as through e.mail to the e.mail ID furnished by the petitioner, which are valid mode of services as prescribed under Rule 64(1)(c) of the APVAT Rules, 2005. In this connection, it is respectfully submitted that the Government of Andhra Pradesh vide G.O.M....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aring, initially, requested for time to file reply affidavit, but then submitted that the reply affidavit is not required and the only point is no service of notice and violation of the principles of natural justice. Consequently, he would argue the matter without filing reply affidavit. The matter was heard. 11. The specific averment regarding service of notice, inter alia in Para 5 of the counter affidavit thus remain uncontroverted. We have no reason to disbelieve the same. 12. Rule 64 of the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Rules, 2005 (in short, the Rules 2005), on the mode of service of orders of notices, provides as under:- "64. Mode of Service of orders and notices:- (1) Unless otherwise provided in the Act, or....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... or to the person's usual or last known address in the State. Clause (c) of Rule 64 (1) provides for sending the notice through E-mail. In view of Rule 64, and Para 5 of the counter affidavit which shows sending of the notices by Post or/and E-mail, it shall be considered in law that the dealer was sufficiently served. Anything to the contrary has not been brought on record. 14. Learned counsel for the petitioner placing reliance on sub-rule (2) of Rule 64, submitted that there is no certificate of service annexed to the counter affidavit. 15. We are of the considered view that under sub- section (1), "shall be considered as sufficiently served" is not dependent upon the certificate of service under sub-section (2). Besides, the averm....