1M/S.RAVI Teja Stone Polishing Industries, Anantapur. Vs the Addl.Commissioner (Ct),Hyderabad & 5 Others

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 toto issue an appropriate Writ or direction, more particularly one in the

¶23

2

¶24

RRR,J & TCDS,J W.P.No.17638 of 2006 & batch

¶25

nature of Writ of Certiorari declaring the impugned order dated 16-6-2006 passed by the 1st respondent in CCT ref No. L-III3/870/2004-1 for assessment year 1992-93 APSRTC as without jurisdiction, illegal, unjustified and consequently quash the said impugned proceeding dated 16-6-2006 passed by the 1st respondent and pass such other order or orders as the Hon039ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case

¶26

IA NO: 1 OF 2006(WPMP 22116 OF 2006

¶27

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 stay the collection of disputed tax of Rs. 34,932/- for assessment year 199293, pursuant to the impugned order dated 16-6-2006 passed by the 1st respondent in CCT ref No. L-III(3)/870/2004-1, pending disposal of the writ petition and pass

¶28

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶29

1.CKR ASSOCIATES

¶30

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶31

1.DANTU SRINIVAS( SPL SC FOR CT)

¶32

2.GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX

¶33

3

¶34

RRR,J & TCDS,J W.P.No.17638 of 2006 & batch

¶35

The Court made the following Common Order:

¶36

(per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)

¶37

The petitioner, which was in the business of polishing and selling granite slabs and other stones, had been granted exemption from payment of sales tax to an extent of Rs.6,26,130/-, for a period of five (05) years from 24.07.1991 to 23.07.1996. However, the respondent authorities initiated assessment proceedings and steps for recovery of the amounts demanded, under the assessment proceedings for this period. The respondents took the stand that the petitioner was not eligible for the benefit of the said exemption granted, under G.O.Ms.No.498, dated 16.10.1989, in view of the subsequent amendments to the G.O.Ms.No.146, dated 25.04.1991.

¶38

The petitioner had raised the contention that the subsequent amendment of the eligibility criteria would affect the case of the petitioner in view of the final eligibility certificate, which had been given by the 4^th respondent. This issue had come up before the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh in the case of Vetstar Agros Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commercial Tax Officer¹ , wherein the Division Bench of the erstwhile High Court, had held that, the tax cannot be demanded, ignoring a duly issued final eligibility certificate.

¶39

A similar issue came up before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Vadilal Chemicals Ltd. vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors.² ,

¶40

1 [2001]124STC421(AP)

¶41

2 AIR2005SC3073, (2005)6SCC292

¶42

4

¶43

RRR,J & TCDS,J W.P.No.17638 of 2006 & batch

¶44

wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court, had held that, the Department of Industries having accepted the tax payer in that case, as an industrial unit eligible for finance, could not have rejected the same, by virtue of subsequent developments.

¶45