Disposed

State of Andhra Pradesh, v. M/s. Nagarjuna Coated Tubes

Telangana HC10 Nov 2004WP/20683/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the State of Andhra Pradesh sought a declaration that the Official Liquidator's inaction in disposing of a sales tax claim petition was illegal and directed the release of sales tax arrears. The Court directed the Liquidator to dispose of the claim petition within two weeks and disposed of the writ petition without discussing maintainability.

What did the court decide?

Directing the Official Liquidator to dispose of the claim petition within two weeks.

State of Andhra Pradesh, Vs M/s. Nagarjuna Coated… — Company and Corporate | Telangana HC (2004)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD

¶2

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

WEDNESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE BILAL NAZKI

¶6

and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.ANANDA REDDY

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO : 20683 of 2004

¶8

Between:

¶9

State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Commercial Tax Officer, Panjagutta Circle, Mayur Kushal Complex, Abids, Hyderabad.

¶10

..... PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

M/s. Nagarjuna Coated Tubes, 8-2-248, Nagarjuna Hills,

¶13

Panjagutta, Hyderabad, Rep. by the Official Liquidator, High Court of Andhra Pradesh Kendriya Sadan, Koti, Hyderabad.

¶14

.....RESPONDENT

¶15

Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a Writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Official Liquidator in not disposing the claim petition and releasing the sales tax amount due by the Respondent firm to the Petitioner is illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction and contrary to Section 16 (C) of the APGST Act and Consequently declare that the Sales Tax and other amounts due under the APGST and CST Acts will have the first charge over the properties of the defaulting dealer in the light of Section 16 (C) of the APGST Act and Section 17 of the CST Act and further direct the Official Liquidator to remit the Sales Tax arrears of the Respondent company to the Petitioner from the sale proceeds of the properties of the Respondent company forthwith

¶16

Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.A.V.KRISHNA KAUNDINYA (SPL.SC FOR CT) Counsel for the Respondent: MR. Anil Kumar, OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR

¶17

The Court at the admission stage made the following :

¶18

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE BILAL NAZKI

¶19

AND

¶20

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. ANANDA REDDY

¶21

W.P.NO. 20683 OF 2004

¶22

ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Mr. Justice Bilal Nazki)

¶23

Heard learned counsel for the parties. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has moved a claim petition before the Official Liquidator for release of sales tax amount and it is not being disposed of. Learned counsel appearing for the Official Liquidator submits that the writ petition is not maintainable and a company application has to be filed before the Company Court. In view of the very short controversy and in view of almost innocuous relief claimed, we do not go into the question of maintainability of the writ petition. Therefore we direct the Official Liquidator to dispose of the claim petition filed by the petitioner in accordance with law within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs.

BN J.

SAR J.

Dt. 10.11.2004

Sd/-

ASST. REGISTRAR

1.The Commercial Tax Officer, State of A.P., Panjagutta circle, Mayur Kushal complex, Abids, Hyderbad.

¶32

2. The Official Liquidator, High Court of A.P., Kendriyasadan, Koti, Hyderabad.

¶33

3. 2 CD copies

State of Andhra Pradesh, v. M/s. Nagarjuna Coated Tubes

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State of Andhra Pradesh, v. M/s. Nagarjuna Coated Tubes

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P.Madhava Naidu, Vs The Commercial Tax Officer-I

M/s.The Amadalavalasa Co.operative Sugars Limited, Vs The Commercial Tax Officer

M/s. Desai Brothers Ltd., Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

M/s Vijaya Lakshmi Agencies Vs The Commercial Tax Officer

K. Madhava Rao Vs The Union of India, Ministry of Commerce and Industry

M/s. Shivashakthi Cashew products, Vs Commercial Tax officer