M/S Taha Enterprises Begumbazar Hyd v. Comissioner Of Ct Ap Hyd
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR AND THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE ANIS SPECIAL APPEAL No.1 of 2001 JUDGMENT: (per Hon'ble Sri Justice Sanjay Kumar) This Special Appeal, under Section 23(1) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 (for brevity "the Act"), is sought to be preferred by the assessee in relation to the order dated 14.02.2000, passed by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, in exercise of revisionary power under Section 20(1) of the Act. 2.
This exercise of revisionary power was occasioned in the context of the order dated 10.03.1998 passed by the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (Commercial Taxes), Secunderabad Division, Hyderabad, upon an appeal filed by the assessee against the assessment proceedings dated 18.04.1992 in GI.No.5758/91-92 passed by the Commercial Tax Officer, Agapura Circle.
3.
The specific ground taken by the assessee in filing the said appeal with such a long delay was that the assessment order had not been served upon it. However, the appeal was preferred without a supporting condone delay application and the order of the Appellate Deputy Commissioner does not even indicate any condonation of delay having been permitted.
4.
Sri T. Vinod Kumar, learned Special Standing Counsel for Commercial Taxes, would however state that the assessee itself had authorised service of the assessment order for the year 1991-92 upon the brother of its proprietor under letter dated 18.04.1992 and such service was duly effected. The learned Special Standing Counsel would further point out that it was only in the year 1998 that the assessee addressed a letter asking for a certified copy of the assessment order for the year 1991-92 for the purpose of settlement of its accounts with the manufacturers and on the strength of the said order, the appeal was filed in the year 1998. The learned Special Standing Counsel also produced the record and copies of the letters aforestated were placed on record.
5.
The letter dated 18.04.1992 clearly reflects that the proprietor of the assessee informed the Commercial Tax Officer, Agapura Circle, Hyderabad, that he had authorised his brother, Sri Syed Jaffer Ahmed, to receive the assessment order for the year 1991-92 as he was going out of the station. 6.
It is not the case of the assessee, even before this Court, that the said Authorised Representative did not receive the assessment order. Further, the letter addressed by the assessee in the year 1998 specifically reads to the effect that the assessment order was required for the purpose of settlement of accounts with the manufacturers. This being the factual situation, we are of the opinion that the very filing
of an appeal before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner was lacking in bonafides. The delay on the part of the assessee in filing such an appeal was not even condoned and the appellate Deputy Commissioner passed an order in its favour straight away without looking into these crucial factual aspects.
7.
Though the learned counsel for the appellant would contend that the revisionary order passed by the Commissioner is liable to be set aside on various grounds, we are of the opinion that the very foundation for the litigation, being the appeal filed by the assessee, was an abuse of the process and the appellant cannot be permitted to raise such a ground. Even if there is any illegality in the revisionary order, setting aside the same would restore the wholly unsustainable appellate order, which is impermissible on law. 8.
The appeal therefore fails and is accordingly dismissed. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. No order as to costs.
_______________________ SANJAY KUMAR, J _____________________ ANIS, J Date: 27.10.2016 Msr
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR AND THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE ANIS SPECIAL APPEAL No.1 of 2001 27.10.2016 Msr