The Telangana Supreme Court charges the examiner legal fees for not considering evidence during the assessment.
In the recent Telangana Supreme Court case, the examiner was charged legal fees for failing to consider the evidence submitted by the petitioner. As a result, the petitioner alleged in his plea that he had neither received a warning nor given the petitioner the opportunity to be heard personally. The interviewee, ie the evaluation officer, has just adopted the contested evaluation order, ignoring the two declaration forms submitted by the petitioners.
The petitioner also argued that it is the duty of the evaluator to obtain and check the minutes from the authority before issuing the evaluation order. In this context, the AO must also take into account the personal hearing of the petitioner, which was not carried out in the present case. According to the Deputy Government Commissioner, the Appraiser did not request the minutes from the Authority and could not see this material submitted by the petitioner and therefore could not take into account the evidence submitted by the petitioner prior to the issuing of the assessment decision.
The Telangana Supreme Court bank ruled that the manner in which the Trade Tax Commissioner and officials under him perform their duties violates the rights of all appraisers and leaves them no choice but to turn to the Supreme Court for questions They seek justice that the AO refused to grant them for failure to adhere to the principles of natural justice. Therefore, in view of the matter at hand, the court ordered the AO to deliver a notice of exhibition reasons, in accordance with Rule 64 (1) (b) of the Telangana VAT rules for petitioners, stating the proposed sales and the tax to be levied on them. The petitioner is also given 6 weeks to file an objection with the evidence. After that, the AO will hear the petitioner and then pass the order in accordance with the law, giving the correct reasons.