Telangana High Court

WP/24853/2004 of M/s Siria India Limited Vs Commercial Tax officer on 30 December 2004

COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.H.S. ANSARI AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ELIPE DHARMA RAO WRIT PETITION NO : 24853 of 2004 Between: M/s Siris India

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

THURSDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND FOUR

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.H.S. ANSARI

AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ELIPE DHARMA RAO

WRIT PETITION NO : 24853 of 2004

Between:

M/s Siris India Limited C/o Rallies India Ltd.,S.D.Road, Secunderabad, Rep.by its Authorised,Signatory Sri P.D.Paul.

AND

..... PETITIONER

1. Commercial Tax officer Saroornagar Divisional , Saroornagar , Hyderabad. Saroornagar , Hyderabad.

2. Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT) Hyderabad, Rural Division at Nampally, Hyderabad.

3. Addl.Commissioner (CT) Legal Nampally, Hyderabad.

.....RESPONDENTS

Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in thecircumstances stated in the affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue awrit, order or a direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus or anyother appropriate writ, order or direction declaring the impugned notice dated 23.12.2004issued by the 1st respondent as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction and set aside the sameand consequently direct the 1st respondent not to recover the disputed tax of Rs.23,84,884/- due for the assessment years 1998-99 (APGST) and 2000-2001 (APGST &CST) from the petitioner pending disposal of the appeals before the 2nd respondent .

Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.BHASKAR REDDY VEMIREDDYCounsel for the Respondents: SPL GP FOR TAXES

Page 1 of 3

The Court made the following :

O R D E R

(Per Sri Justice M.H.S.Ansari)

Heard.

Petitioner has questioned the demand notice dated 23.12.2004 demanding arrears of tax forthe assessment years 1998-1999 and 2000-2001.

It is the case of the petitioner that for the assessment year 1998-1999 the stay application was rejected by the Additional Deputy Commissioner (CT)and revision against the same has been filed before the Additional Commissioner (CT).With regard to assessment year 2000-2001 the stay application is pending before theAppellate Authority being the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT).

Keeping in view that the appeals against the order of assessment for two years in questionare pending before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT)-2[nd] respondent herein,interest of justice would be served if the petitioner is directed to deposit 50% of the tax indispute pertaining to each of the assessment years in respect whereof appeals have beenfiled by the petitioner-assessee, the appellate authority shall dispose of the appeals for the respective years in accordance with law without insisting upon the deposit of the balancedisputed tax of 50%.

It is hereby directed that petitioner shall deposit the aforesaid 50% of the disputed tax aftergiving credit to the amounts, if any, already paid by the petitioner within a period of fourweeks from date hereof. Consequently, the impugned demand notice dated 23.12.2004shall remain in abeyance until disposal of the appeals pending before the appellate authorityand thereafter the same shall abide by the final orders that may be passed by the appellateauthority.

With the observations as above, writ petition accordingly stands disposed of.

-------------------------------

JUSTICE M.H.S.ANSARI

30[th] December, 2004

Page 2 of 3

------------------------------------------- JUSTICE ELIPE DHARMA RAO

PGS