Disposed

M/s. Ncl Seccoplor Limited, v. The Commercial Tax Officer

Telangana HC3 Mar 2005WP/3670/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging the rejection of a stay order, the High Court ordered a temporary stay on the collection of disputed tax, conditioned on the petitioner depositing 50% of the amount by a specified date, and directed the raising of an attachment on a garnishee.

What did the court decide?

Stay of collection of disputed tax upon deposit of 50% by 31.3.2005; attachment on garnishee raised.

M/s. Ncl Seccoplor Limited, Vs The Commercial Tax… — GST and Indirect Tax | Telangana HC (2005)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD

¶2

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

THURSDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.H.S. ANSARI

¶6

and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE T.CH.SURYA RAO

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO : 3670 of 2005

¶8

Between:

¶9

M/s. NCL Seccoplor Limited, Abids, Hyderabad - 500 001, Rep. by its Company Secretary, CH. Rajendra Varma.

¶10

..... PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

1 The Commercial Tax Officer, Nampally Circle, Hyderabad.

¶13

2 The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), Secunderabad Division,

¶14

Hyderabad. 3 The Additional Commissioner (CT) Legal, Andhra Pradesh, Nampally, Hyderabad.

¶15

.....RESPONDENT(S)

¶16

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 of Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ or order or direction quashing the order of 3rd Respondent in CCt's Ref.No. LIII(1)/103/2005, dated 18-2-2005 refusing to order stay of recovery of disputed tax levied by 1st Respondent for the assessment year 2001-02 under the APGST Act as illegal, arbitrary and unjustified and consequently restrain the 1st respondent from taking any coercive steps for collection of balance disputed tax of Rs. 6,97,567/- pending disposal of the appeal

¶17

before the 2nd Respondent and pass such other order or orders as the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

¶18

Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.S.DWARAKANATH Counsel for the Respondents: Mr.K.Raj Reddy, Spl. S.C. for C.T.

¶19

The Court made the following :

¶20

ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice T.Ch.Surya Rao)

¶21

After having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Special Standing Counsel (C.T.), we are inclined to dispose of the main writ petition itself. Appeal is pending before the 2^nd respondent herein. Without entering into the merits of the case since it is directed against the rejection of the stay order, we dispose of the writ petition with the following directions:

¶22

There shall be stay of collection of the disputed tax subject to the petitioner depositing 50% of the same on or before 31.3.2005. On such deposit, the 2^nd respondent shall consider the appeal pending before him on its own merits and dispose of the same in accordance with law. The attachment effected on the garnishee shall stand raised.

¶23

The writ petition is disposed of with the above directions without costs.

¶24

(M.H.S.ANSARI, J.)

¶25

(T.CH.SURYA RAO, J.)

¶26

03.03.2005

¶27

Note:

¶28

Issue copy of the order on priority basis B.O.

¶29

kpr

¶30

¶31

1 The Commercial Tax Officer, Nampally Circle, Hyderabad.

¶32

2 The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), Secunderabad Division,

¶33

Hyderabad. 3 The Additional Commissioner (CT) Legal, Andhra Pradesh, Nampally, Hyderabad.

¶34

4. 2 copies to the Spl.S.C. for C.T., High Court Buildings, Hyderabad (O.U.T.) 5. 2 C.D. copies

M/s. Ncl Seccoplor Limited, v. The Commercial Tax Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. Ncl Seccoplor Limited, v. The Commercial Tax Officer

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

M/s.Sirpur Paper Mills Ltd., Vs The Principal Secretary

Sri Sai Srinivasa Agencies Vs Commercial Tax Officer

M/s.Hotel Kamal (P) Ltd., 9-1-167/168, Vs The Commercial Tax officer

M/s.Shine Enterprises, rep.by Manager Mr.Pallate Damodar Vs The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes

B.Nageswara Rao, Vs The District Collector

Sri Venkateshwara Rice Industries, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by