M/s. Bpl Limted, Urdu Hall Lane, Himayatnagar, Vs Assistant Commissiner (Ct)(Ltu)

The controversy is that pending appeal, application for stay filed by the petitioner was dismissed by the competent authority. We have gone through the record and heard learned counsel for the parties. We feel that the interest of justice would have been met if stay was granted pending appeal, subject to deposit of 50 per cent of the disputed tax. Therefore, we set aside the order of the authority and direct that 25 per cent of the disputed tax shall be paid by the petitioner on or before 31^st March, 2006 and another 25 per cent shall be paid by him within two weeks thereafter. Till 31^st March, 2006, there shall be an unconditional stay and the stay shall continue till disposal of the appeal, provided the amount is deposited within the time as stipulated above. The deposit of amount shall be without prejudice to the rights of the petitioner in the appeal.

¶18

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs.

¶19

(Bilal Nazki, J)

¶20

17^th March, 2006

¶21

(G.Chandraiah, J)

¶22

vrn

M/s. Bpl Limted, Urdu Hall Lane, Himayatnagar, v. Assistant Commissiner (Ct)(Ltu)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. Bpl Limted, Urdu Hall Lane, Himayatnagar, v. Assistant Commissiner (Ct)(Ltu)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Laxmi Venkateswara Enterprises, rep.by J.Purushotham Vs Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its Secretary to

Nethi Reddaiah General Merchants, Vs Government of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its

M/s.Automotive Manufacturers Pvt. Limited, 8571, Vs The Commercial Tax Officer, R.P.Circle, Secunderabad

Venkateswara Marketers, Vs Government of Andhra Pradesh

L.Panduranaiah and Sons Vs Government of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its

Vasundara General Stores, represented by Vs Government of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its