TATA CELLULAR LTD Vs. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is a Public Limited Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and is engaged in the business of providing cellular services in the State of Andhra Pradesh and also sells Cellular handsets. The petitioner is a registered dealer under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and is on the rolls of the 1st respondent herein.

(2.) In this writ petition, the petitioner has sought for a Writ in the nature of Mandamus declaring that the notice issued by the 1st respondent to the HDFC Bank, Hyderabad, the 3rd respondent herein under Section 17 of the Act as illegal and void and to pass appropriate consequential orders.

(3.) The background facts for filing this writ petition be noted briefly as under: The Assistant Commissioner (CT) (Int-I), Enforcement Wing, O/o Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Hyderabad, 2nd respondent herein inspected the business premises of the petitioner in the month of August, 2000. As the petitioner did not deduct any tax at source on works contracts awarded by it, the second respondent issued show-cause notice dated 23-09-2000 for the assessment years 1997-98, 1998-99 and 1999-2000 calling for an explanation as to why the turnovers relating to works contracts not be subjected to tax at source. Subsequently, the 2nd respondent passed orders for the three assessment years demanding an amount of Rs. 1,27,854.00 for 1997-98, Rs. 8,02,252.00 for the year 1998-99 and Rs. 2,92,647.00 for the year 1999-2000 respectively. Aggrieved by the above orders passed by the 2nd respondent, the petitioner preferred appeals and stay applications for all the assessment years before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner, Secunderabad Division. The Appellate Deputy Commissioner rejected all the stay applications for all the three assessment years on 19-12-2000. The petitioner being aggrieved by the orders passed by the Appellate Deputy Commissioner dismissing the stay petitions preferred revision petitions in Form-XXII on 11-01-2001 under Section 19(2-B) of the Act for all the three assessment years before the Joint and Additional Commissioner (CT) (Legal). Hyderabad. The stay petitions filed before the Joint and Additional Commissioner (CT) (Legal) are pending presently. When the mater stood thus, the 1st respondent issued three notices dated 23-12-2000, 08-01-2000 and 18-01-2001 requesting the petitioner to pay the arrears of tax and all these notices were issued subsequent to the dismissal of stay petitions by the Appellate Deputy Commissioner on 19-12-2000. Since the arrears of tax were not paid, it appears that the 1st respondent issued notice under Section 17 of the Act to the 3rd respondent-garnishee on 29-01-2001. A copy of the said notice was also forwarded to the petitioner on 30-01-2001. In the counter, it is stated that in response to the garnishee notice, the 3rd respondent-garnishee paid the amount on 30-01-2001 and the same was remitted to the Government account on 31-01-2001.