TREVC/82/2010 of THE STATE OF AP, REP.BY STATE REPRESENTATIVE BEFORESTAT, HYD Vs M/S BINJUSARIA METAL BOX COMPANY, HYDERABAD. on 8 December 2025

[ 348e j

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD

MONDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF DECEMBER

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY

AND

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO

TAX REVISION CASE NO: 82 OF 2010

Tax Revision Case under Section 22('l) Read with Rule 10 of APGST Rules under Section APGST Act to revise the order dated 07.11.2008 passed in T.A.No.

479 of 2002 on the file of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad.

Between:

The State of Andhra Pradesh, REP.By State Representative Before STAT, D.No.

5-4-404 to 408, Nampally, Hyderabad.

.

...Petitioner

AND

M/S Binjusaria Metal Box Company, C-12, Chandulal Baradari, Hyderabad.

...Respondent

Counsel for the Petitioner : Special Government Pleader for the State Tax Counsel for the Respondent : Sri Bhaskar Reddy Vemireddy The Court made the following: ORDER

I

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAI)

THI' HONOTIRABLE SRT JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY

AND

THE HONOURABLE SRI .IUSTICE

SUDDALA CHALAPATIII RAO

08.1 2.2025

lletu'cen:

Thc Statc of'Andhra Pradesh.

Rep. bi the State Representative belore STAT, D.No.5-4-404 to 408. Nampally.

Anrlhra Pradcsh. I lr derahatl.

. . . Pctitioncr

AND

M/s Birtjusaria Metal llox Company.

C- 12, Chandulal lJaradari.

I lyderabad-

. . Respondent

ORDER: tlrr I htr'hlc .\ri .lu.sritt, P.SA1V KOSHY)

'I his Tax Revision Case is filed by the petitioner under St:ction 22( I ) rcad u'ith Rule l0 ot'the Andhra I'radesh General Sales Tax Rules, 1957 praving the Court to revise the order dated 07.11.2008 in

1.A.No.479 of 2002 passcd by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Andhra Pradesh. I lyderabad.

2.

Ileard thc leamed Special Governrnent Pleader for the State fax, lor the petitioner. Perused the record TAX ILEVISION CASE No.82 OF 2010

2

3.

From a pcrusal of the record it appears that the tax liabilitv involved in the instant case against the respondent-Assessee is onl;'

{.2.407.00. I'aking into consideration the amount of tax liability that is involved in the instar-rt case, we are of thc considered opinion thal the instant Revision is not worth entertaining on the limited ground itselt.

Another reason whv this Court is not inclined to entertain the l(evision case at this.juncture is that the l-ax Revision Case lor an amount ol'

{ 2.407.00 is pending since I998 onrvards.

4.

'fherefbre, lbl all the afbresaid reasons, thc instant l ax Itcvision Case is dismisscd. No costs.

5.

Ilowever, we rnake il clcar that the disposal ol thc instant tax revision case is bcing only on the ground that the nlorlctar) implication involved and as such rre have not expresscd any opiniori on thc mcril.s of the case. -l hc substantive issue involved in the case rvruld be lelt open to be decided in an appropriate case.

6.

As a sequel. nriscellancous petitions, pending if any. shall stand closcd Sd/. N. SRIHARI

DEPUTY REGIS

//TRUE COPY//

ECTION OFFICER

To,

1 . The Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad'

2. Two CCs to the Special Government Pleader for State Tax, State of Telangana, High Court Buildings, at Hyderabad (OUT) -

g. one CC to Sri Bhaskar Reddy Vemireddy, Advocate [OPUC]

4. Two CD Copies

\a

DL

I

HIGH COURT

DATEO:0811212025