STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH Vs. J PAPAIAH CH SIMHACHALAM COMPANY
LAWS(APH)-1971-2-7
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Decided on February 05,1971

STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH Appellant
VERSUS
J PAPAIAH CH SIMHACHALAM COMPANY Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) THE State has preferred this revision against the order of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal in Tribunal Appeal No. 742/67.
(2.) THE Tribunal allowed the appeal preferred by the respondent-assessee on grounds among others that the revisional powers exercised by the Deputy Commissioner were not exercised suo motu but were put in motion on an office note put up by the staff and that the exercise of revisional powers under Section 20 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act (hereinafter called the Act) on the basis of an office note "is clearly contrary to the spirit of the provisions of Section 20 and therefore the assessment order made by the Deputy Commissioner was against the statutory provisions". The other ground on which the appeal was allowed was that the Deputy Commissioner even before he heard the objections of the respondent-assessee to the show cause notice made up his mind to revise the assessment as is borne out by his letter to the Joint Secretary, Board of Revenue, with the result that the well-known rule of audi alteram partem has been violated thus resulting in manifest injustice to the respondent-assessee.
(3.) THE Government Pleader for sales tax cases has assailed the order under revision on the ground that the Tribunal was in error in observing that the revisional authority cannot be said to have acted suo motu when he acts on information furnished to him by the office or other sources and the interpretation placed upon the-words 'suo motu' by the Tribunal is not correct in law and does not accord with the accepted interpretation of that expression. It is also sought to be contended that the Tribunal was not justified in observing that the Deputy Commissioner had pre-judged the issue even before he heard the respondent-assessee. The order is sought to be sustained by Mr. T. Ramam, appearing for the respondent, relying upon the findings recorded by the Tribunal. To appreciate the contentions put forth it is necessary to state the facts leading up to the filing of the revision.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.