SEW CONSTRUCTIONS LIMITED Vs. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner challenges the validity of the provisional assessment order in G. I. No. 7531/95-96 dated February 5, 1996 as being violative of principles of natural justice as well as rule 12 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Rules, 1957. The petitioner is a public limited company engaged in the business of execution of works contracts. For the period from April 1, 1995 to December 31, 1995, the petitioner filed form A-2 returns. The first respondent not being satisfied with the correctness of the returns called upon the petitioner to submit certain statements of works and on the basis of the material thus provided, proceeded to make the impugned provisional assessment order and on that basis issued form B2 demand notice calling upon the petitioner to pay a tax of Rs. 77,08,174. It is the correctness of this order that is assailed in this writ petition.

(2.) MR . S. Krishna Murthy, the learned counsel for the petitioner, contends that under rule 12 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Rules, it is incumbent on the assessing authority to give reasonable opportunity of proving the correctness of the return. Without giving such an opportunity, the impugned provisional assessment order is passed and so it is liable to be quashed. The learned Government Pleader however, contends that rule 12 is not attracted and that the petitioner has a right of appeal against the provisional assessment order.

(3.) THE second paragraph of rule 12, extracted above, makes it clear that where any return submitted by the dealer appears to be incorrect to the assessing authority, the authority has to give a reasonable opportunity to the dealer to prove the correctness and completeness of the return submitted by him and has to make an enquiry as he may deem necessary and then has to assess to the best of the judgment.