High Court disposed of a writ petition seeking to quash an order for tax collection and stay realization. The court, in view of consensus at the bar, stayed realization of disputed tax subject to deposit of 12.5% before the appellate authority.
Stay of realization of disputed tax subject to 12.5% deposit.
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.
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA: AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF SEPTETUBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY
WRIT PETITION NO: 32956 0F 2022
Between:
Nil/s Patanjali 4yr-_gd !!d., (lhrough its Authorized Signatory - Shri yaj Dev frya).SurveyNo..50, 51-54 Part, KeshavaramTanda, KestiavaramViilage, Shamirpet Mandal, Medachal, Malkajgiri Telangana, 501401
,..PETITIONER
AND
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction, more particularly a writ in the nature of Writ of Certiorari to quash the order bearing ACO No.89/2022 dated 24.03.2022 passed by the 2nd Respondent being illegal and arbitrary and set aside the setaside the same and interdict the order of the 4th Respondent for collecting the balance disputed tax of Rs.8,98,93,659/- for the tax period April, 2O1l to June, 2017 tll the disposal of the appeal bearing No. BVl57l2O21-22 pending before the
?
1 I i
Appellate Dy' commissioner (cr), punjagutta Division, Hyderabad, arong with ail consequential notice / demand notice and pass
lA NO: 2 oF 2022
Petition under Section .151 cpc prayingthat in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the.petition, in""nigh dorrt may be preased to orant stav of order of the 2nd Respondenr vioe nco "r.io.a stzozili{ei'i;.;; ;o;;'"" well as notice dated 26O?2!?? issued by +in HesponOent from coilecting the balance disputed tax of Rs.8,98,93,659/- ior'iii"'il* perioo from Aprir, 2017 to June, 2017 pending disposal of the Writ petition.- '-'
Counsel for the petitioner: SRI pRIyADARSHI MANISH
Counsel for the Respondent No.1: Gp FOR REVENUE
Counsel for Respondent Nos.2 to 4; SRI L.VENKATESWARA RAO
The Court made the following: ORDER
I I :
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHIIYAN AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BIIASKAR REDDY
WRIT PETITION No.32956 of 2022
ORDER: {Per Lh.e Hot'ble the CLLiE Justice Ujjal Bhug@n)
Heard Mr. Priyadarshi Manish, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. L.Venkateswara Rao, learned counsel for the respondents.
relief:
1
"For the aforesaid reasons and circumstances stated in thc accompanying affidavit, it is therefore prayed that this Honble Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction, more particularly a writ in the nature of writ of certiorari to quash the order bearing ACO No.89/2022 dated. 24.03.2022 passed by the 2"d respondent being iilegal and arbitrary and set aside the same and interdict the order of the 4,h respondent for collecting the balance disputed tax of Rs.8,98,93,659 /- for thc ta-x period April, 2Ol7 to June, 20 i 7 till thc ciisposa.l of the appeal bearing No.BV 157 /2021-22 pending belore the Appellate Dy. Commissioner {CT}. Punjagutta Dir.isron, I{yderabad, along withaII consequential notice/demand notice and pass such order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstalces of the case."
Miscellaneous applications per-rding, if any, shall stand ciosed. Hor,r,ever, there shall be no order as to costs.
t\
SD/.N.CHANDRA SEKHAR RAO ASSISTANT REGI9TRAR //TRUE COPY// U SECTIOfi OFFICER
1
i
MRC Ps"h--
I I HIGH COURT
DATED:0210912022
ORDER
WP.No.32956 ot 2022
-1=:
<br>[3'r]lj
DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS
/ ,--,,\t )
__-./
m0-
r t\ro>-"--
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to quash the order for collection of disputed tax and stay its realization pending disposal of the appeal.
Whether to grant a stay on the realization of disputed tax subject to deposit of 12.5%.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Patanjali
State of Telangana
Additional Commissioner (ST) Legal
Deputy Commissioner Appeal
Assistant Commissioner (CT) (LTU)
Ujjal Bhuyan
C.V. Bhaskar Reddy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
