M/s Laxmi Engineers & Contractors v. The Commercial Tax Officer
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 20 Nov 2006
- Bench
- CHELAMESWAR, D APPA RAO
Provisions considered
Judgment
Cause title
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.APPA RAO
WRIT PETITION NO.5684 OF 2006
Date:20-11-2006 Between: M/s Laxmi Engineers & Contractors …Petitioner
And The Commercial Tax Officer …Respondent
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE J.CHELAMESWAR AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.APPA RAO
WRIT PETITION NO.5684 OF 2006
O R D E R (Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice J.Chelameswar):
The writ petition is filed with a prayer as follows: the reasons stated
For the accompanying affidavit, it is prayed that the Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction declaring the action of the respondent in passing the impugned proceedings dated 14.2.2006 in FORM VAT 305 levying tax, penalty of Rs.84,416/- and interest of Rs.14,675/- in the same order as arbitrary, contrary to the provisions of the AP VAT Act 2005 and also in violation of principles of natural justice and consequently declare the action of the respondent in levying tax, penalty and interest in one proceeding is not justified and pass such other order or orders or direction.
The impugned order is clearly an appealable order under Section 31 of the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (for short “the Act”). In these circumstances, we do not see any reason to entertain this writ petition and the same is accordingly dismissed at the admission stage. However, it is open to the petitioner, if he is so advised, to file an appeal under Section 31 of the Act within a period of one week from today. ______________________ (J.CHELAMESWAR,J) Dated 20th November, 2006 _____________________
(D.APPA RAO,J)
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
AP VAT Act, 2005; Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2005 — s. 31.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 20 Nov 2006. The bench was CHELAMESWAR, D APPA 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.