✦ Andhra Pradesh High Court · 23 May 2006

M/s. Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages v. The Assistant Commissioner (CT), LTU

Writ Petition No. 10212 of 2006L NARASIMHA REDDY, D APPA RAO

Case at a glance

Decided
23 May 2006
Bench
L NARASIMHA REDDY, D APPA RAO

Outcome

Disposed of

Hence, the writ petition is disposed of directing that there

Judgment

Operative part

ORDER: (PER SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY) Petitioner is the manufacturer of beverages and aerated water. It is assessed to tax from time to time. The 1st respondent has passed order of assessment for the year 2002-2003 holding that the petitioner is liable to pay balance tax of Rs.4,56,35,109/-. The petitioner disputed a portion of this assessment and preferred an appeal before the 2nd respondent. The petitioner also filed an application for stay and on its being rejected by the 2nd respondent, it approached the 3rd respondent by way of revision. The revision was also dismissed on 18.05.2006. Hence, this writ petition. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Commercial Taxes. The validity or otherwise of the order of assessment passed against the petitioner needs to be considered at the hearing of the appeal before the 2nd respondent. The petitioner is said to have deposited an amount of Rs.3.31 crores towards disputed tax as part compliance with the order of assessment. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view, that ends of justice would be met if the petitioner is required to deposit a further sum of Rs.62,00,000/- within three weeks from today. This amount would result in payment of half of the assessed tax. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of directing that there shall be stay of further steps in pursuance of the order of assessment passed by the 1st respondent, pending disposal of the appeal by the 2nd respondent, on condition that the petitioner deposits a further sum of Rs.62,00,000/- (Rupees Sixty two lakhs only) within a period of three weeks from today. No costs. ___________________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J _________________ D. APPA RAO, J Date: 23.05.2006 ES/BSC

Questions this judgment answers

What did the Court decide in this case?

The Court recorded the following disposition: Hence, the writ petition is disposed of directing that there

Which court decided this case, and when?

Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 23 May 2006. The bench was L NARASIMHA REDDY, 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.

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. 10212 of 2006). ← Search more judgments