✦ Andhra Pradesh High Court · 18 Jun 2010

M/s Tickwell Trexim Privte Ltd v. The Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Tax Department (Vigilance)

GODA RAGHURAM, R KANTHA RAO

Case at a glance

Outcome

Allowed

In view of the submissions above, these writ petitions are allowed

Judgment

Cause title

M/s Tickwell Trexim Privte Ltd., rep. by its Director Mr.Subham Maheswari ...Petitioner

vs. The Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Tax Department (Vigilance) Guntur and others ...Respondents

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO W.P.NOs. 10772, 10857, 11015, and 11017 of 2006 ORAL

COMMON ORDER:

Operative part

(Per GR,J) In these writ petitions, the orders of the State Government in G.O.Ms.No.558, Revenue, dated 13-06-1967 are assailed as being arbitrary, without the authority of law and contrary to the powers conferred on the State Government under sub-section (5) of Section 8 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, and Section 5 of the said Act read with Section 38 of the A.P.G.S.T.Act,1957 and as ultra vires Article 286 of the Constitution and seeking invalidation of the orders of assessment, passed under the provisions of A.P.G.S.T.Act,1957, as specified in each of these writ petitions. It is represented by Sri Bhaskara Reddy Vemireddy, the learned counsel for the petitioners and the position is fairly conceded by the learned Government Pleader that these writ petitions are covered by the judgment of a learned Division Bench of this Court dated 23-03-2010 in W.P.No.16926 of 2006 and the writ petitions are required to be allowed on the basis of the said judgment. In view of the submissions above, these writ petitions are allowed as prayed for. The orders of the State Government in G.O.Ms.No.558, Revenue, dated 13-06-1967 are declared unsustainable and quashed. The orders of assessment challenged in these writ petitions stand quashed. It is however open to the appropriate assessing authority to take appropriate steps in accordance with law, but in conformity with the declarations herein. No order as to costs. ______________ GODA RAGHURAM,J ______________ R.KANTHA RAO,J 18TH JUNE 2010. TSNR

Questions this judgment answers

What did the Court decide in this case?

The Court recorded the following disposition: In view of the submissions above, these writ petitions are allowed

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 — s. 8; A.P.G.S.T. Act, 1957 — s. 38; Constitution of India — art. 286.

Which court decided this case, and when?

Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 18 Jun 2010. The bench was GODA RAGHURAM, R KANTHA 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 more judgments