Dismissed

The State of Ap, Rep.by Thestate Representative Before Stat, v. M/S Salzigitter Hydraulics Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad.

Telangana HC26 Aug 2025TREVC/214/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the State's tax revision case. The court held that since the assessee's parallel tax revision cases challenging the assessment and interest were previously allowed by this Court, the present revision filed by the State regarding the penalty became infructuous and automatically stood decided.

What the court decided

AI extract

The State of Ap, Rep.by Thestate Representative Before Stat, Vs M/S Salzigitter Hydraulics Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad. — Telangana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

[^348s I

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT^{FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD

¶3

TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH^{DAY OF AUGUST} TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY^FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE^{P.SAM KOSHY} AND

¶6

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE^{SUDDALACHALAPATHIRAO}

¶7

TAX REV ISION CASE NO:^{214 OF 2009}

¶8

Tax Revision Case under section^{22(1) Read with Rule 10 of APGST} Rules under section APGST^{Act against the orderdated18-02-2009in T.A.No.} 881 of 2008 on the^{file of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Andhra Pradesh,} Hyderabad for the Assessment^{Year 1-4-2005 to 1-9-2007 preferred againstthe} order dated 29-09-2008 in^{Appeal No.R/67/2007-2008 on the file of the Deputy} Commissioner^{(CT), RuralDivision,Hyderabad,preferred againstthe Final} Assessment order dated^{13-02-2008 in TIN No. 28570213252 0n the file of the} Commercial Tax Officer, Madhapur^{Circle, Hyderabad.}

¶9

Between:

¶10

The State of Andhra Pradesh,^{Rep. by the State RepresentativebeforeSTAT,} D.No.5-4404 to 408, Nampally,^{Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad.}

¶11

,..PETITIONER

¶12

AND

¶13

M/s Salzigitter Hydraulics^{Pvt Ltd, 59-8, CIE} [Expn],^{Balanagar, Gandhinagar,} Hyderabad - 37

¶14

...RESPONDENT

¶15

Counsel for the Petitioner:^{Mr. SwaroopOorilla'} Special Government^{Pleader for State}

¶16

Counsel for the Respondent:^{Mr. S.R.R. Viswanath}

¶17

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶18

I \

¶19

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY ANT)

¶20

TTIE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE S. CHALAPATHI RAO

¶21

TAX REVISION CA SE No .214 0F 2009

¶22

ORDER, (per Hon'ble Sri Justice^p.Sam Koshy)

¶23

Heard Mr. Swaroop Oorilla, leamed Special Government pleader for State Tax, appearing for the petitioner and Mr. S.R.R. Viswanath, learned counsel for the respondent. perused the record.

¶24

The instant is a tax revision case which has been filed by the State assailing the order dated 18.02.2009 passed by the Sales'fax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad (for shorr, 'the Tribunal,) in T.A.No.gg l of 200g.

¶25

Vide the impugned order, the leamed Tribunal had partly allorved the appeal to the extent that the order of imposing penarty under section 53 was set aside. However, the tax interest levied on the state was confirmed.

¶26

It has been informed that there were counter appeals that were preferred by the assessee vide T.R.E.y.C.Nos.90, gl, 92, 93, 94 & 95 of 2009, where the challenge by the assessee was to the imposing of the tax and also interest thereon and the said tax revision cases preferred by the assessee stood allowedby this High Courtvide its order dated,09.06.2014. It has also been informed that there is no further challenge to the order

¶27

¶28

, r--1 ....:

¶29

dated 09.06.2014 passed by this High Court in the said batch of tax

¶30

revrslon cases.

¶31

In view ofthe aforesaid decision ofthis High Court in the batch of tax revision cases preferred by the assessee, we are of the considered opinion that the instant tax revision case automatically stands decided as the quantum which was subjected to challenge by the assessee itself has been allowed by this High Court and the impugned assessment of tax and levy of interest has been set aside. The appeal preferred by the State Govemment in this tax revision case so far as the penalty part is concemed does not arise at all. The present Tax Revision Case also therefore, stands dismissed in terms of the order passed by this High Court in the batch of tax revision cases decided on 09.06.2014. There shall be no

¶32

order as to costs

¶33

Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand

¶34

closed

¶35

SD/- R.KARTHIKEYAN JOINT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To, 1. The Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. 2. The Deputy Commissioner (CT), Rural Division, Hyderabad. 3. The Commercial Tax Officer, Madhapur Circle, Hyderabad. 4. Two CCs to GP FOR TAX, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUTI

¶40

One CC to tvlr. S.R.R. Viswanath, Advocate IOPUC]

¶41

Two CD Copies

KamiPSL

HIGH COURT

DATED:2610812025

ORDER

TREVC.No.214 of 2009

$ I rltT 2U5
-'. t

DISMISSING OF THE TAX REVISION CASE

¶50

I
x(
q
\q

The State of Ap, Rep.by Thestate Representative Before Stat, v. M/S Salzigitter Hydraulics Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

The State of Ap, Rep.by Thestate Representative Before Stat, v. M/S Salzigitter Hydraulics Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The State of Ap, Rep.by State Representative Before Stat Vs M/S Bharat Heavy Electricals Limtied, Hyderabad.

The State of Ap. Rep.by State Representative Before Stat, Vs M/S Bharat Heavy Electricials Limtied, Hyderabad.

M/S. Partani Dall Industries, R.R.Dist. Vs Rep. by Its State Rep. Before Stat, Hyd.

Masanipally Arjun Vs The State of Telangana

Nizam Family Welfare Assn. Hyd and stamp 2 Others Vs Chief Commr. of It. Ii, Hyd and 4 Others

Sb.Rookya Begum Vs The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax-Ii