Dismissed

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

Telangana HC12 Oct 2023WP/27272/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Infr. Projects Pvt. Ltd. filed a writ petition to quash an assessment order, arguing it was passed without a show cause notice and violated natural justice. The Division Bench observed the petitioner had simultaneously filed an application for One Time Settlement. The Court disposed of the writ without deciding merits, allowing the petitioner to pursue the settlement application.

What the court decided

AI extract

M/S.Tbpr Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd. Vs The… — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

13386I

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

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

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO: 27272 OF 2022

¶9

Between:

¶10

!1s,TBlR^{Jnfra 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 Drstrict, Hyderabad-500055, Telangana.

¶11

..PETITIONER

¶12

AND

¶13

The Commercial Tax Officer, Vengalrao Nagar Circle Hyderabad

¶14

The Commercial Tax Officer Audit, Punjagutta Division Hyderabad

¶15

The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Government of Telangana Hyderabad

¶16

4 The State of Telangana, Rep by its Secretary Revenue CT Department Secretariat Buildings Hyderabad

¶17

...RESPONDENTS

¶18

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 grant an order, direction or writ, more so in the nature of Writ of Certiorari, quashing the Assessment Order vide A.O-No.65513 dated 29.11.2021 by the 2nd Respondent under the TGVAT Act, 2005 as it has been passed without issuing a show cause notice to the Petitioner company, as being illegal, arbitrary and highhanded, apart from being in contravention of the NAT Act and CST Act and violative of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of Law and principles of natural justice.

¶19

lA NO: 3 oF 2022

¶20

Petitron under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed rn support of the petrtron, the High Court may be pleased To stay all further proceedrngs including recovery and penalty proceedings pursuant to the Assessment Order vide A.O.No.65513 dated 29.11.2021 passed by the 2nd Respondent.

¶21

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI SUJITH JAISWAL

¶22

counser ror the Respono""t'':Slf.

¶23

Z?1tJi35tflEXb,o. ,o

¶24

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶25

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P. SAM KOSHY AND THE HON,BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA^ALISHETTY

¶26

W.P.No. 27272 of 2022

¶27

ORDER: /2<:r lfo^'LLe Sri JLtst(e P.SAItl XOSHY)

¶28

Heard Sri Sujith Jaiswal, learned counsel for the petitioncr and Sri K. Bhaskar Reddy, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Commercial Taxes appearing for the respondents. Perused the record.

¶29

The present writ petition has been filed challcnging the impugned Assessment Order vide A.O.No.65513 clated 29.1I.2021 passed by respondent No.2 under TGVAT Act, 2005.

¶30

The present writ petition was filed on 27.06.2022 and thc matter came up for hearing before the Division Bench on 24.06.2022. On 28.O6.2022, 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 12.OT.2022, OB.Og.2023 and 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 benefir of OTS.

¶31

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 avaiting the benefit

¶32

¶33

¶34

PSK,] & L ,\ I W P No- 27222 c,t )O2)

¶35

of OTS. The said application hled seems to have been filed on 27.06.2022. Lcarned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has come up with some arrangement and shall bc making all thc outstanding clues at the earliest and meanwhile, he may be pcrmitted to pursue the said application of orS which hc has filed before the authorities concerned.

¶36

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 rr ould not like to enter into the merits of the case. Horvever, the petitioner is permitted to pursue the application of OTS afresh bcfore the authorities concerned in accordancc rvith thc rules governing the field and take appropriate recourse lor the benefits that are available to him under the OTS .

¶37

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

¶38

Miscellaneous applications pending, iI any, shall stand

¶39

closed

¶40

SD/.A.V.S.PRASAD ASSISTA2TIEGISTRAR ,TRUE COPY//

¶41

SECTION OFFICER

¶42

To,'1 . The Commercial Tax Officer, Vengalrao Nagar-Circle Hyderabad .

¶43

i. 3. The ii"i; Gil;riial^{Commissioner Tax oftiier'nuoitl li'"c"it'it]?Jui Puniagutta Division Hvderabad'iu*"t' Governmentof relangana} Hvderabad

¶44

a The Secretary,^Revenue '^{CT' Department SecretariatBuildings State of}

¶45

ror the^{State or}

¶46

x iiiB&ti #'"',"JHl8.E$'$Eslx"fiiJ:'*Yn?r '"'n " +H";;; '"t^{Pl'6""636 louri}

¶47

7.^{Two CD CoPtes}

¶48

BSK ^ .. GJP^{v i'\Li.}

HIGH COURT

DATED:1211012023

ORDER

WP.No.27272 of 2022

DISPOSING OF^{THE WRIT PETITION} WITHOUT COSTS

¶54

gn(.
\ri
{

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

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

Case brief

What is this about?

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 and 3 others

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