Remanded

S.Kiran, v. The Government of Telangana

Telangana HC7 Aug 2014WP/22409/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order in Writ Petition No. 22409 of 2014 directs the Regional Transport Officer to decide within one month whether the petitioner is liable to pay tax on a seized vehicle as per the Memo dated 28.08.2003. The court restrained the petitioner from transferring possession pending the decision.

What did the court decide?

Regional Transport Officer shall decide tax liability for the seizure period within one month based on Memo dated 28.08.2003; petitioner restrained from transferring possession.

S.Kiran, Vs The Government of Telangana — Motor Accident Claims | Telangana HC (2014)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.22409 OF 2014

¶5

DATED:7.8.2014 Between: S. Kiran … Petitioner And The Government of Telangana Rep. by its Principal Secretary Transport Roads & Buildings Department Secretariat Hyderabad and others … Respondents

¶6

THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO.22409 OF 2014

¶8

ORDER: (per the Hon’ble the Chief Justice Sri Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta)

¶9

The petitioner assails the action of the Regional Transport Officer, Medchal, Ranga Reddy District, in demanding tax and penalty in respect of the vehicle bearing No.AP 28 TA 8658, on the ground that the said vehicle was under seizure.

¶10

A similar issue fell for consideration before this Court in W.P.No.12514 of 2014 and by judgment dated 23.04.2014, this Court directed the Deputy Transport Commissioner concerned to decide as to whether any tax was due in respect of the seized vehicle in terms of the Memo dated 28.08.2003 issued by the Transport Commissioner, Andhra Pradesh.

¶11

For reasons alike, the third respondent – Regional Transport Officer is directed to decide the issue as to whether the petitioner would be liable to pay any tax in respect of the seized vehicle in question for the period of seizure in terms of the aforesaid Memo. It would be open to the petitioner to produce all documents in support of his case and after duly considering the same, the third respondent shall pass a reasoned order in the matter in accordance with law. The entire exercise shall be completed expeditiously and in any event, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. In the meantime, the petitioner shall not transfer, alienate or part with the possession of the vehicle in question or any of its accessories.

¶12

The writ petition stands disposed of with the above direction. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. No order as to costs. ________________________ K.J. SENGUPTA, CJ _______________________ SANJAY KUMAR, J 7.8.2014 bnr

S.Kiran, v. The Government of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Kiran, v. The Government of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K. Narsimha Reddy, Vs Union of India

D.V.S.S.R Patnaik Vs Union of India

Sri B.Sridhar Rao, Vs The Assistant Superintendent of Post Offices

Hajahshariff Mohammad Vs Special Deputy Collector, L.a.Ongc., Rajahmundry

T. Madan Mohan Reddy, Vs Sri B.R. Meena, I.A.S.

Syed Abdul Hameed Vs Mohammed Khaleel