TADI VENKATESWARA RAO Vs. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition has been filed questioning the validity of the impugned noticed dated August 20, 1992 issued by the Assistant Commercial Tax Officer, Devi Chowk, Rajahmundry, East Godavari District, the second respondent herein, calling upon the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs. 38,389 due from Shri Nandamoori Venkata Rayudu of Rajahmundry towards the arrears of tax payable for the year 1984-85. The impugned notice, prima facie, reveals that the petitioner's father gave his property as security for payment of tax, if any, due from Shri Nandamoori Venkata Rayudu of Rajahmundry. The main grievance of the petitioner is that the impugned demand notice has been issued to him without affording any opportunity to him and that he is not aware whether any security has been offered by his father and, if so, what its terms and conditions are. Prima facie, it appears to us that the impugned demand notice has been issued to the petitioner without providing reasonable opportunity to him. Therefore, the impugned demand notice is quashed. This, however, does not preclude the respondents from passing appropriate orders for the recovery of the amount in question after giving a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner. If any such notice is given, it is open to the petitioner to submit his explanation and satisfy the authorities how he is not liable to pay the amount in question.

(2.) THE writ petition is accordingly allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. Advocate's fee Rs. 200. Petition allowed.