Telangana High Court
WP/39079/2013 of M/s.Rice N Rice, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, on 31 December 2013
G. ROHINI and HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T. SUNIL CHOWDARY WRIT PETITION No.39079 of 2013 Date: December 31, 2013 Between: M/s. Rice N Rice, D.No.27-20-24, Shop No.3 & 4, Governorpet, Vijayawada, rep. by its Proprietrix Smt. Pushpa K. Salwani. … Petitioner And 1. The State of Andhra
HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINIandHON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T. SUNIL CHOWDARY
WRIT PETITION No.39079 of 2013
Date: December 31, 2013
Between:
M/s. Rice N Rice, D.No.27-20-24,
Shop No.3 & 4, Governorpet,
Vijayawada, rep. by its Proprietrix
Smt. Pushpa K. Salwani.
… Petitioner
And
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. The State of Andhra Pradesh,
Rep. by its Principal Secretary,
Revenue (CT-II) Department,
Hyderabad & 3 others.
… Respondents
* * *
HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINIandHON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T. SUNIL CHOWDARY
WRIT PETITION No.39079 of 2013
O R D E R: (Per Hon’ble Ms. Justice G. Rohini)
Aggrieved by the Assessment Order dated 27.09.2013made under the provisions of the A.P. VAT Act, 2005, thepetitioner filed an appeal before the 2[nd] respondent on 02.12.2013. It is stated that the petitioner also filed an application on26.12.2013 seeking stay of recovery of the disputed tax.
In the meanwhile the impugned notice dated 10.12.2013came to be issued under the A.P. Revenue Recovery Act, 1864proposing to sell the attached movable property of the petitioner for realization of the amount due under the Assessment Ordertreating the petitioner as a defaulter. Aggrieved by the same, thepresent writ petition is filed.
We have heard the learned counsel for both the parties.
Having regard to the fact that the petitioner’s application forstay of recovery of the disputed tax is yet to be considered by the2[nd] respondent, we deem it appropriate to protect the interest ofthe petitioner till an appropriate order is passed by the 2[nd]respondent on the said application. Accordingly, withoutexpressing any opinion on merits of the case, the impugned salenotice dated 17.12.2013 is set aside and the Writ Petition isdisposed of with a direction to the respondent No.2 to dispose ofthe petitioner’s application for stay following due process of law asexpeditiously as possible preferably within a period of two weeksfrom the date of receipt a copy of this order. Till such time, nocoercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner for recovery ofthe amounts due under the Assessment Order dated 27.09.2013.
W.P.M.P. No.39079 of 2013 shall stand closed inconsequence. No costs.
______________
G. ROHINI, J
Date: December 31, 2013.
__________________________
T. SUNIL CHOWDARY, J
Note:Issue C.C. in three days. //B.O.// BSB
HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINIAND
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T. SUNIL CHOWDARY
BSB
WRIT PETITION No.39079 of 2013 (Per Hon’ble Ms. Justice G. Rohini)
Date: December 31, 2013