Disposed

M/s.Sushee Infra Private Limited, v. Commercial Tax Officer, Basheerbagh Circle, Hyderabad.

Telangana HC28 Oct 2013WP/29517/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This common order set aside impugned assessment orders passed under the A.P. Tax on the Entry of Motor Vehicles into Local Areas Act, 1996, as the authority failed to furnish the circular forming the basis of the levy to the petitioner before the order was issued.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner permitted to submit objections within four weeks; impugned assessment orders set aside and writ petitions disposed of.

M/s.Sushee Infra Private Limited, Vs… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Telangana HC (2013)

¶1

THE HONOURABLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.SUNIL CHOWDARY

¶2

WRIT PETITION Nos.29517, 29490, 29632 and 29666 OF 2013

¶3

Date: 28.10.2013

¶4

Between:

¶5

M/s. Sushee Infra Private Limited (formerly known as M/s. Sushee Hi-tech Construction (P) Ltd.) Plot No.246/A, MLA Colony Road No.12, Banjara Hills Hyderabad – 500 034 Rep. by its General Manager (Finance & Taxation) Sri V.Somaiah

¶6

…Petitioner

¶7

And Commercial Tax Officer Basheerbagh Circle Hyderabad

¶8

…Respondent

¶9

THE HONOURABLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.SUNIL CHOWDARY

¶10

WRIT PETITION Nos.29517, 29490, 29632 and 29666 OF 2013

¶11

COMMON ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Ms. Justice G.Rohini)

¶12

The petitioner in all these four writ petitions is a Private Limited company engaged in the business of works contract. It is an assessee under the A.P. VAT Act, 2005 as well as Central Sales Tax, 1956 on the rolls of the Commercial Tax Officer, Basheerbagh Circle, Hyderabad. The petitioner was awarded the work of Khairagura Open Cast Project at M/s. Singareni Collieries Limited, Bellampally Area, Adilabad District, and for the purpose of execution of the said work the petitioner purchased twenty (20) numbers of Mercedes Benz Aitros

¶13

Tippers from M/s. Mercedes Benz India Private Limited, Pune. Aggrieved by the Entry Tax levied by the Road Transport Authorities under the A.P. Tax on the Entry of Motor Vehicles into Local Areas Act, 1996 (for short “Entry Tax Act”) the petitioners had earlier filed writ petitions and the same were disposed of by this Court along with a batch of writ petitions setting aside the assessment orders and remitting the matters to the Assessing Officer to proceed further to consider whether the items in dispute are motor vehicles or not, and giving liberty to the petitioners to avail the alternative remedy provided under the Entry Tax Act and the A.P. VAT Act.

¶14

Whileso, the Commercial Tax Officer passed separate assessment orders dated 30.04.2013 purportedly in terms of the order of this Court in the earlier batch of writ petitions determining the liability of the petitioner to pay the Entry Tax for the months of May 2008, July 2008 and October 2008. The said assessment orders dated 30.04.2013 are assailed before us in the present writ petitions.

¶15

We have heard Sri S.Suribabu, the learned counsel for the writ petitioner and Sri P.Balaji Varma, the learned Special Standing Counsel for Commercial Taxes appearing for the respondent.

¶16

As could be seen from the material available on record, the impugned assessment orders are assailed primarily on the ground that the Circular dated 17.05.2010 on the basis of which the said order came to be passed was not furnished to the petitioner.

¶17

A perusal of the impugned orders shows that the tax liability of the petitioner is determined solely on the basis of the Circular dated 17.05.2010.

¶18

The writ petitions were adjourned on 10.10.2013 to enable Sri P.Balaji Varma, the learned Special Standing Counsel for Commercial Taxes to get instructions as to the allegation in the writ petitions. When the matter is taken up today for consideration, the learned Standing Counsel has not disputed the petitioner’s plea that the Circular dated 17.05.2010 was not furnished before passing the impugned orders, however, a copy of the same has been served on

¶19

the learned counsel for the petitioner today in the Court.

¶20

Under the circumstances, the petitioner is hereby permitted to submit its objections to the tax proposed to be levied within four weeks from today. If the objections are received within the time fixed above, the respondent shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders afresh in accordance with law.

¶21

Accordingly, the orders impugned in all the writ petitions are hereby set aside and the Writ Petitions are disposed of with the above directions. No costs.

¶22

Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in these Writ Petitions, shall stand closed.

¶23

____________ G.ROHINI, J

¶24

________________________ T.SUNIL CHOWDARY, J Date: 28.10.2013 MVA

M/s.Sushee Infra Private Limited, v. Commercial Tax Officer, Basheerbagh Circle, Hyderabad.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s.Sushee Infra Private Limited, v. Commercial Tax Officer, Basheerbagh Circle, Hyderabad.

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

M/s. Help Hospitals Private Limited Vs The Joint Commissioner (Ct) Legal

M/S.Choudhary Brothers Hyderabad Vs State of Ap and Others

Vxxxx Vs Xxxxx

Mother Theresa Educational Society Vs State Bank of India, Rep. by its Branch Manager

M/s.Sushee Infra Private Limited Vs Commercial Tax Officer

Mother Theresa Educational Society Vs State Bank of India