TREVC/23/2010 of THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH Vs M/S. KAMINENI HOSPITALS LIMITED on 8 December 2025

[ 348e ]

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYOERABAD

MONDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF DECEMBER

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

PRESENT

TAX REVISION CASE NO: 23 OF 2O1O

Tax Revision Case under Section 22(1) R/w Rule 10 of APGST Rules U/s APGST Act against the order dated 02-07 -2009 in T.A.No.1324 of 2004 on the flle of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad for the Assessment Y ear 2O0 1 -2OOZ(APGST).

Beh^/een:

The State Of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by the State Representative before STAT D. No. 5-4-404 to 408, Nampally, Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh

... Petitioner/Respondent

AND

M/s. Kamineni Hospitals Limited, L.B.Nagar, Hyderabad.

...RespondenUAppellant

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI SURIBABU S (SPL SC FOR CT AP)

Counsel for the Respondent: SRI J V RAO

The Court made the following: ORDER

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY

AND

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO

IN TTIE TIIGII COTIIIT FOIT THE STATE OF TOLANGANA

AT HYDERABAT)

TIIIi HONOURAI}LE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY

AND

TIII' II()NOUIIABLE SRI .IUSTICI

STIDD.\ I,A CHALAPATTII RAO

'l',,\X RE\rlSION CASE No.23 0F 2010

I)atcd:08.12.2025

Between:

The State ol' Andhra Pradesh,

Rep. by the State Represcntativc belore Sl'A'f , D.No.5-4-404 to 408, Nanrpally, Anrlhra Prarlesh. H yderahatl.

. . Petitioner

AND

lWs.Kamineni Hospitals [-i rnited,

L.B.Nagar, Hyderabad.

. . . Respondent

OBDER: (per IIon'ble Sri.ltr.trice P.SAM KOSHI')

I'his 'fax Revision Case is filed by the petitioner under Section 22(l) read with Rule l0 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Rules, 1957 praying the Cou( to revise the order dated 02.07.2009 in T.A.No.l324 of 2004 passed hy the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad.

2.

Heard the leamed Special Govemment Pleader for the State Tax, for the petitioner. Perused the record.

3.

Frorn a perusat of rhe record it appears that the tax tiability involved in lhe illstanl casc against the respondenf_ArssesSee is only ./

./

l

\

(

(

<2, I7. 145.00. Taking into consideration the arnount of tax liability that is involved in the instant case, we are of the considered opinion that the instant Revision is llot worth entcftaining on the liurited ground itselL

Anothcr reason u'hy this Court is not inclined to entertailt the Rcvision case at this juncture is that the Tax Rcvision Cas€ for an anrourtt of {2, 17.1.+5.00 is pending siucc 2002 onu,ards.

4.

Thercfore, ftir all tlrc aforesaid reasons, the instant Tax Revision Casc is clisnrisscd. No costs.

5.

However, we make it clear that the disposal of the instant tax revision case is being only on ttre ground that the monctary implication involved and as such we have not expressed any opinion on the rnerits of the case. 'l hc substantrrc issuc involved in the case woulci be lelt

6.

As a scrlucl. rnisct'llancous petitions, pending if any, slrall stand closed i/TRUE COPY//

SD/.K,SRINIVASA RAO

JOINT REGISTRAR

SECTION OFFICER

To,

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

2. One CC to Sri Suribabu S (SPL SC for CT Ap) Advocate [OpUC]

3. One CC to Sri J V Rao, Advocate [OpUC]

4. Two CD Copies

open to bc decidecl in an appropriate case.

I

"o"'0" fu=-

HIGH COURT

DATED: 0811212025