This Court dismissed a writ petition challenging the validity of GO M.S.No.503 Revenue (CT-2) dated 08.05.2009, which amended Rule 67 of the AP VAT Rules. Relying on a previous judgment that upheld the G.O., the Court found no basis to declare it illegal or unconstitutional.
Petition dismissed; no order as to costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
WRIT PETITION No.6817 of 2014
ORDER: (Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice Ashutosh Mohunta)
The petitioner has filed this writ petition for declaring GO M.S.No.503 Revenue (CT-2) Department, dated 08.05.2009 in so far as it relates to amendment of Rule 67 of the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Rules 2005, as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional being violative of Article 14, 19 (1) (g) and Article 265 of the Constitution of India.
The validity of the aforesaid G.O., was considered by this Court in Maks Casting Private Limited, Uppal Village & Others Vs Government
of Andhra Pradesh & Others ,[1] wherein the validity of the aforesaid G.O, has been upheld.
In view of the above, this writ petition is dismissed in terms of the judgment referred to above. There shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand dismissed.
________________________ ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA,J.
M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY,J .
Date : 10-03-2014 Rds
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
WRIT PETITION No.6817 of 2014 Date : 10.03.2014
Rds
[1] 2010 (51) APSTJ 189
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the declared G.O. relating to amendment of Rule 67 of the AP VAT Rules 2005 is illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional.
Whether the validity of the challenged G.O. remains settled by the previous judgment in Maks Casting case.
Whether the writ petition challenging the G.O. should be dismissed in light of the earlier judgment.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Maks Casting Private Limited, Uppal Village & Others Vs Government of Andhra PradeshReferred¶5
2010 (51) APSTJ 189
4 provisions across 2 enactments
The Petitioner
Government of Andhra Pradesh
Ashutosh Mohunta
M. Satyanarayana Murthy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
