JUDGMENT M.S. Ramachandra Rao, J. - In these Writ Petitions, petitioner is questioning the proceedings dt.10.06.2020 passed by the Profession Tax Officer, IDA Gandhi Nagar Circle, Hyderabad Rural Division, Hyderabad, who is also the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, IDA, Gandhi Nagar Circle, Hyderabad Rural Division, Hyderabad (for short 1st respondent'), for the tax periods April, 2014 to March, 2015, April, 2015 to March, 2016, and April, 2018 to March, 2019 under the Telangana Tax on Profession, Trades, Callings and Employments Act, 1987 (for short 'the Act'). 2. Petitioner is a Society under the name and style of Vikas-the Concept School, registered under the Registrar of Societies, Ranga Reddy. It is engaged in imparting of Education and is registered on the rolls of the 1st respondent. 3. Under the Act, for the assessment years 2014-15, 2015-16 and 2018-19, the 1st respondent had completed the assessment as far as profession tax is concerned vide proceedings dt.22.02.2020 and the tax due thereon was also paid by the petitioner for the respective periods and the assessment become final. 4. On 19.06.2020, petitioner received the impugned proceedings dt.10.06.2020 passed by the 1st respondent for the assessment years 2014-15, 2015-16 and 2018-19 levying for these years under the provisions of Sections 7, 11, 12 and Rule 24 of the Act penalty for late filing of monthly returns and late payment of taxes, and also levying interest for such late payments on the petitioner. 5. Prior to the passing of the impugned orders, show cause notices dt.22.02.2020 were served on the petitioner on 27.02.2020 and representative of the petitioner appeared before the 1st respondent and sought one month time. Thereafter notices dt.20.03.2020 were issued and served on the petitioner on 21.03.2020, and in the said notices, petitioner was granted 7 days time from the date of its receipt to file objections. 6. However, on account of COVID-19 pandemic situation there was a lockdown imposed by the State Government as well as the Central Government which continued up to July, 2020. Therefore, the petitioner was disabled from filing objections on or before 28.03.2020. 7. The 1st respondent did not wait and proceeded to pass the impugned ex-parte orders on the ground that the petitioner had not availed the opportunities given to the petitioner. 8. Therefore, the petitioner was disabled from filing objections on or before 28.03.2020. 7. The 1st respondent did not wait and proceeded to pass the impugned ex-parte orders on the ground that the petitioner had not availed the opportunities given to the petitioner. 8. Counsel for the petitioner contends that there has been violation of principles of natural justice because the petitioner did not file objections to the notices issued by the 1st respondent on account of the lockdown imposed by the State Government as well as the Central Government in view of COVID-19 pandemic situation; that levy of penalty can only be done if non-payment of tax, is without any reasonable cause; that penalty cannot exceed 50% of the tax due; but in the instant case, maximum penalty has been imposed for the late filing of the returns as well as late payment of tax contrary to Section 7(3) of the Act and therefore, the impugned orders have to be set aside. 9. Sri J.Anil Kumar, Special Counsel for Commercial Taxes appearing for respondents does not deny that the petitioner was disabled from filing objections on account of the lockdown imposed in the State of Telangana both by the State Government and Central Government, and that the principles of natural justice were therefore not followed before passing of the impugned orders on 10.06.2020 by the 1st respondent. 10. Having regard to the admitted fact that there is a lockdown in the State of Telangana from 21.03.2020 till the 1st week of July, 2020, the petitioner cannot be blamed for not filing the objections to the show cause notices dt.20.03.2020 served on the petitioner on 21.03.2020 after the lockdown commenced. 11. Since there has been violation of principles of natural justice, remedy of appeal provided under Section 15 of the Act would not come in the way of the petitioner availing the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 12. 11. Since there has been violation of principles of natural justice, remedy of appeal provided under Section 15 of the Act would not come in the way of the petitioner availing the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 12. Accordingly, these three Writ Petitions are allowed; the impugned orders dt.10.06.2020 passed by the 1st respondent for the assessment years 2014-15, 2015-16 and 2018-19 under the Act are set aside; petitioner is granted four weeks time to file objections to the show cause notices dt.22.02.2020 issued to it by the 1st respondent along with supporting material; the 1st respondent shall provide a personal hearing to the petitioner after receipt of such objections from the petitioner; and then the 1st respondent shall pass a reasoned order in accordance with law and communicate it to the petitioner. It is made clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the contentions of both sides. No order as to costs. 13. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed.