✦ Andhra Pradesh High Court · 30 Mar 2011

M/s.D.S.Gupta Constructions Private Limited v. The Additional Commissioner (CT) (Legal), Office of the Commissioner of Commercial

Writ Petition No. 18067 of 2009V V S RAO

Case at a glance

Provisions considered

Judgment

Cause title

M/s.D.S.Gupta Constructions Private Limited, Flat No.302, Shiva’s Pioneer Plaza, Megha Hills, Madhapur, Hyderabad, represented by its Regional Manager, Mr.N.Hari Kumar, S/o.N.S.Bangaram .. Petitioner

And The Additional Commissioner (CT) (Legal), Office of the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Nampally, Station Road, Opp. Gandhi Bhavan, Hyderabad and others .. Respondents

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.18067 OF 2009

ORDER:

(Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ramesh Ranganathan) The order of the first respondent dated 25.07.2009, rejecting the petitioner’s application for stay pending disposal of the appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal (STAT), is under challenge in this writ petition. By the impugned order dated 25.07.2009 the first respondent rejected their request for grant of stay on the ground that the petitioner had failed to produce any documentary evidence with regards his contention that there was no under declaration of tax. Sri B.Srinivas, learned counsel for the petitioner, would submit that by virtue of an order of attachment of the bank account of the petitioner, the entire tax assessed has been recovered from them and it is only the penalty amount under Section 53(3) of the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (the Act, for brevity) equivalent to 100% of the tax due which has been stayed by this Court. Since the substantive appeal is pending adjudication before the STAT, we consider it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition directing the respondents not to take any coercive steps on condition of the petitioner paying 25% of the penalty amount within a period of four weeks from today. Subject to the above observations, the writ petition shall stand disposed of. However, in the circumstances, without costs. ________________ (V.V.S. RAO, J) _____________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J

30.03.2011 KH

Questions this judgment answers

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2005 — s. 53(3).

Which court decided this case, and when?

Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 30 Mar 2011. The bench was V V S RAO.

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Andhra Pradesh High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. Writ Petition No. 18067 of 2009). ← Search more judgments