Kalpataru Project International Ltd Vs Union of India (Andhra Pradesh High Court)
This article discusses the case of Kalpataru Project International Ltd Vs Union of India in the Andhra Pradesh High Court. The proceedings are being questioned on the grounds of jurisdiction, as the notice proposing revision of a VAT refund was issued by a Deputy Commissioner instead of a Joint Commissioner
The petitioner, engaged in the erection and installation of towers, was assessed to VAT and a refund was initially sanctioned in 2019. However, no refund was provided, and instead, a revision notice was issued proposing a demand of over Rs. 28 crores. The petitioner challenged this revision notice in a writ petition, raising several contentions. They argued that the power of revision is limited and cannot exceed the scope of the original proceedings. They also claimed that the revision notice was an attempt to delay the refund process. Furthermore, it was pointed out that the present notice was issued by the Deputy Commissioner, whereas the original assessment was conducted by a Joint Commissioner.
The Andhra Pradesh High Court took note of the petitioner’s concerns and observed that the authorities had shown haste in adjudicating the revision notice. Additionally, the court acknowledged that the matter was already posted before them, and despite this, the 4th respondent issued a personal hearing notice to the petitioner. Considering these circumstances and the absence of a counter filed by the learned Government Pleader, the court ordered a stay of further proceedings before the 4th respondent until further orders.
The matter was argued by Ld. Counsel Bharat Raichandani
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Heard Sri Bharath Raichandani and Sri Mittal, learned counsels, representing on behalf of Sri Sai Sundeep Manchikalapudi, learned counsel for petitioner on record and learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax representing on behalf of the respondents.
It is seen that while the matter is posted today before us and the said fact was brought to the notice of the 4th respondent by way of letter dated 26.06.2023 through email, the 4th respondent issued personal hearing notice to the petitioner directing him to be present before him on 30.06.2023 at 11.30 a.m. Having regard to these circumstances and as the learned Government Pleader has not so far filed counter, we deem it appropriate to direct that the further hearing before the 4th respondent shall be stayed until further orders.
At request of learned Government Pleader, for filing counter and hearing, post on 12.07.2023.
