Dismissed

M/s Kozylon Industries Limited, v. Commercial Tax Officer

Telangana HC10 Mar 2014WP/6843/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court dismissed the writ petition challenging an Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax amendment rule as unconstitutional, relying on the valid judgment in Maks Casting Private Limited and directing the respondents to consider the petitioner's pending representation.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is dismissed. Respondents directed to consider the petitioner's representation.

M/s Kozylon Industries Limited, Vs… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Telangana HC (2014)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA AND

¶2

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

¶3

WRIT PETITION No.6843 of 2014

¶4

ORDER: (Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice Ashutosh Mohunta)

¶5

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.

¶6

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.

¶7

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the tax exemption was given to the petitioner in the year 2005 with effect from 2002 for a period of seven years. He further submits that the tax exemption could not have been granted with retrospective effect and that the petitioner has filed a representation before the Government, which is still pending and his representation may be ordered to be considered in accordance with law.

¶8

After hearing the counsel for the parties, we uphold the validity of Rule 67 of the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Rules 2005. With regard to the representation of the petitioner the respondents are directed to consider the same in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders.

¶9

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.

¶10

Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand dismissed.

¶11

________________________ ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA,J.

¶12

____________________________________ M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY,J .

¶13

Date : 10-03-2014 Rds

¶14

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA AND