Dismissed

M/S. Rajaya Lakshmi Traders v. the Commercial Tax Officer, Vuyyuru and Another

Andhra Pradesh HC15 Apr 2024WP/3226/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati dismissed Writ Petition No. 3226 of 2008, filed by M/s. Rajaya Lakshmi Traders challenging tax recovery actions under Article 226 of the Constitution, solely on the ground of want of prosecution.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed for want of prosecution. No order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous petitions closed.

M/S. Rajaya Lakshmi Traders Vs the… — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI

¶2

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

FRIDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF APRIL

¶4

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI AND

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO: 3226 OF 2008

¶9

Between:

¶10

M/S. RAJAYA LAKSHMI TRADERS, GHANTASALA. Rep by Proprietor, Mr. Atkuri Dharma Rao S/o A. Adeiah, Aged about 50 years.

¶11

...PETITIONER

¶12

AND

¶13

The Commercial Tax Officer, Vuyyuru, Krishna District.

¶14

The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer (CT), O/o the CTO., Katuru Road Vuyyuru, Krishna District.

¶15

...RESPONDENTS

¶16

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order, direction particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action on the part of the respondents namely the Commercial Tax officer, and Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Vuyyuru in seeking to recover the arrears of R.D. Cess already

¶17

waived as also APGST on R.D. Cess included in the turnovers prior to 1009-2003 from the petitioner through the impugned noticeⁱⁿ Form^7dt.08- 01-2008 and urgent Notice in RCJA/5/128-2004-2008 as illegal, arbtirary, improper, unfair, without authority of law and without jurisdiction and Ultravires GOMS No. 952 Revenue (CT-II) Departmetn dt 10-09-2003 and grant such other relief or reliefs as deemed fit and proper under the circumstnaces of the case.

¶18

I.A. NO: 4 OF 2008(WPMP. NO: 17845 OF 2008^

¶19

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to kindly consider and grant stay on the collection of the balance of the Disputed tax of Rs. 1,69,951/- also to grant stay with reference to the R.D. Cess levied by the respondent though has been set aside by this Hon'ble Court earlier and direct the 2nd Respondent not to take any action pursuant to the auction notice issued in Form 7-A dated 19-5-2008, scheduling the auction on 30-6-2008 at 3:00 p.m. and grant such other relief or reliefs as are deemed fit and proper under the circumstances of the case.

¶20

I.A. NO: 1 OF 2008fWPMP. NO: 4205 OF 2008)

¶21

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased stay of all further proceedings including sale on 20-02-2008 pursuant to Form 7 notice dt 08-01-2008 issued by the Second respondent pending disposal of the WP or else I will be put to serious loss.

¶22

I.A. NO: 5 OF 2008rWPIVIP. NO: 18283 OF 2008)

¶23

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be

¶24

pleased to grant of extension of time of 3 months to pay the balance amount of Rs. 1,69,951/- after considering the payment of Rs. 86,000/already made towards compliance with the directions contained in the orders dt. 18-2-2008 passed in WPMP No. 4205/2008 or else I would be put to serious loss and hardship.

¶25

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI M V J K KUMAR

¶26

Counsel for the Respondents: SRI SURI BABU S (SPL SC FOR CT AP)

¶27

GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX

¶28

The Court made the following ORDER:

APHC010411652008

[3481]

) ' ^

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶33

FRIDAY ,THE NINETEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶34

PRESENT

¶35

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI

¶36

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA

¶37

WRIT PETITION NO: 3226/2008

¶38

Between:

¶39

M/s. Rajaya Lakshmi Traders ...PETITIONER

¶40

AND

¶41

The Commercial Tax Officer Vuyyuru Another and Others...RESPONDE NT(S)

¶42

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶43

1.M VJ KKUMAR

¶44

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶45

1.GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX

¶46

2.9460/SURIBABU S(SPL SC FOR CT AP)

¶47

The Court made the following:

¶48

ORDER: (per Ravi Nath Tilhari, J)

¶49

No representation for the petitioner. The matter is listed in the weekly

¶50

list.

¶51

The matter pertains to the year 2008.

¶52

In view of the above, the Writ Petition is dismissed for “want of prosecution”.

¶53

No order as to costs.

¶54

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any^{pending,shallalso}

¶55

stand closed.

¶56

SDI- G HELA NAIDU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SEC N OFFICER

To,

One CC to SRI M V J K KUMAR, Advocate [OPUO

¶61

One CC to SRI SURI BABU S (SPL SC FOR CT AP), Advocate [OPUC]

¶62

Two CCs to GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX, High Court of^Andhra Pradesh [OUT]

¶63

Three CD Copies PRK

HIGH COURT

DATEDi19/04/2024

ORDER

WP.No.3226 of 2008

'VO5 2 1 NOV 20?'* 3)
^ Current Section

¶69

DISMISSING THE WP FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION WITHOUT COSTS

M/S. Rajaya Lakshmi Traders v. the Commercial Tax Officer, Vuyyuru and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Rajaya Lakshmi Traders v. the Commercial Tax Officer, Vuyyuru and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shin Woo Engineering Pvt. Ltd., Vs Union of India

M/s VenkatRaamLakshme Auto Agencies, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

M/S.M.Ananda Rao Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

M/S. Mandava Venkata Reddy Son and Co. Guntur Dist. Vs Dy. Commr. of C.T. Guntur and Another

The State of Andhra Pradesh Vs Karnataka Silk Marketing Board Ltd.

The State of Ap, Rep.by the State Representative Before Stat Vs M/S Sri Venkata Sai Ram Traders, Kurnool.