Disposed

M/S.Tbpr Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd. v. The Commercial Tax Officer and 3 others

Telangana HC12 Oct 2023WP/27222/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition challenging an assessment order under TGVAT Act was disposed of without adjudicating merits. The High Court directed the petitioner to pursue an outstanding One Time Settlement application before authorities instead of deciding the writ on merits.

What did the court decide?

Writ Petition disposed of; petitioner permitted to pursue the OTS application before authorities with no order as to costs.

M/S.Tbpr Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd. Vs The Commercial… — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[³³⁸⁶ ]

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

THURSDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO i 27222 OF 2022

¶7

Between:

¶8

M/s. TBPR INFRA PROJECTS PVT. LTD, Rep. by its Managing Director, T.BHANU PRAKASH REDDY, Flat No.110, V.S.S. Nandadeep Apartments, Near MedchalRta Office, Petbhaseerabad, Ranga Reddy District, Hyderabad500055, Telangana.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

The Commercial Tax Officer, Vengalrao Nagar Circle, Hyderabad. 2. The Commercial Tax Officer, Audit Punjagutta Division, Hyderabad.

¶12

The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Government of Telangana, Hyderabad.

¶13

The State of Telangana, Rep by its Secretary, Revenue CT Department Secretariat Buitdings, Hyderabad.

¶14

...RESPONDENTS

¶15

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia^praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High^{Courtmay be} pleased to grant an order, direction or writ, more so in the nature of Writ of Certiorari, quashing the Assessment Order vide A.O.No.32915 dated 20.05.2019 by the 2nd Respondent under the TGVAT Act, 2005 as it has been^{passedwithout} issuing a show cause notice to the Petitioner company, as being illegal, arbitrary and highhanded, apart from being in contravention of the TVAT Act and CST Act and violative of Article^'14 and 21 of the Constitution of Law and^principles of natural^justice.

¶16

lA NO: 3 OF 2022

¶17

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings including recovery and penalty proceedings pursuant to the Assessment Order vide A.O.No.32915 dated20.05.2019 passed by the 2nd Respondent.

¶18

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI SUJITH JAISWAL Counsel for the Respondents: SRI K.BHASKAR REDDY, A GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX

¶19

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶20

I \

¶21

, I

¶22

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P. SAM KOSHY AND THE HOI{'BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY W.P.No.27222 of 20.22

¶23

ORI)ER: /per rfo n'bte Sri Justice p.sAM KOSHfl)

¶24

Heard Sri Sujith Jaiswal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri K. Bhaskar Reddy, learned Assistant Government pleader for Commercial Taxes appearing for the respondents. perused the record.

¶25

The present writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned Assessment Order vide A.O.No.329l5 dated 20.05.2019 passed by respondent No.2 under TGVAT Act, 20O5.

¶26

The present writ petition was filed on 27.06.2022 and the matter came up for hearing before the Division Bench on 28.06.2022. On 28.06.2022, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner perhaps is seeking One Time Settlement of outstanding dues. The matter again came up for hearing again on t2.O2.2022, 08.Oa.2023 arrd on 03.10.2023. On the aforesaid dates, learned counsel for the petitioner had repeated the same that the petitioner is intending to avail the benefit of OTS.

¶27

Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner produced an application which he has submitted before the authorities concerned for availing the benefit

¶28

¶29

¶30

PSKJ & LN,.,, W .IJ .No . 27222 of 2022

¶31

of OTS. The said application filed seems to have been filed on 29.06.2022. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has come up with some arrangement and shall be making all the outstanding dues at the earliest and meanwhile, he may be permitted to pursue the said application of OTS which he has filed before the authorities concerned.

¶32

Given the fact that the petitioner has already moved an application availing the benefit of OTS which is pending consideration before the authorities concerned, this Court, at this juncture would not like to enter into the merits of the case. However, the petitioner is permitted to pursue the application of OTS afresh before the authorities concerned in accordance with the rules governing the held and take appropriate recourse for the benehts that are available to him under the OTS .

¶33

Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶34

Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand

¶35

closed.

¶36

¶37

essrsifliJaJAYrti5fE //rRUE copyl ( lp SECNON OFFICER

¶38

¶39

1 The Commercial Tax Officer, Vengalrao Nagar Circle, Hyderabad.

¶40

2 The Commerciat Tax officer, auoii eun1agut-ti oi"iilih, Avo"iloao ) The Commissioner of Commercial rairjilcovernr#i'orillrnginr, Hyderabad.

¶41

4 The Secretarv Revenue CT Department Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad, State of Telanoana

¶42

5 9nu 99^{ro sRT suJtTH JAtswAL,} Advocate ropucl 6 Two CCs to Gp FOR COMMERCTAL fnk,-Ht'gh Co;h for the State of Telangan_a, at Hyderabad. [OUT]

¶43

1. Two CD Copies

PSK GJ

HIGH COURT

DATED:1211012023

ORDER

WP.No.27222 of 2022

1 gr€ SIAr€
v
t
o
I' 1: N0\ 2tJ8
'() ai
t
l Itfsrri'C tr( o

¶50

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS.

¶51

tv2-,,
r<br>to

M/S.Tbpr Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd. v. The Commercial Tax Officer and 3 others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S.Tbpr Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd. v. The Commercial Tax Officer and 3 others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P Murray, Secunderabad and 3 Others Vs M Mallesha, Hyderabad and 2 Others

M/S.Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd. Vs the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal

A.Narsinga Rao Vs Assistant Commissioner of Incoeme Tax

M/S.Tbpr Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd. Vs The Commercial Tax Officer and 3 Others

M/S.Tbpr Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd. Vs The Commercial Tax Officer

M/S.Tbpr Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd. Vs The Commercial Tax Officer, And 3 Others