Writ petition challenging a garnishee notice issued under Section 29 of the APVAT Act for assessment year 2005-2006 (CST). Petitioner's counsel submitted the matter had become infructuous; the court dismissed the writ petition as infructuous, with no order as to costs, and closed miscellaneous petitions.
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.
[348e ]
:' ; I ! i: I :
,t ! i l. I It. I It I I II I t' :
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TV/ENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO
WRIT PETITION NO: 19288 OF 2008
Between:
M/s. Electronics Corporation of lndia Ltd., Chedapally, Hyderabad, rep. by its Accounts Manager, Sri V. Venkateswarlu, S/o. V. Venkatasubbaiah.
.....PETITIONER
AND
The Assistant Commissioner (Cf) LTU and lnt, Saroornagar Division, M.J. Road, Nampally, Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh.
.....RESPONDENT
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 an appropriate writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the garnishee notice dated 1-9-2008 issued by the respondent to the banker of the petitioner under Section 29 of the APVAT Act for the assessment year 2005-2006 (CST) as illegal, unjustified and contrary to the provisions of law.
|.A.NO:1 OF 2008(WPMP.NO:2S150 OF 2008)
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 the collection of tax of Rs. 1 ,68,98,985/- for the assessment year 2005-2006
j t I I i I I
(CST) pursuant to the notice dated 1-9-2008 issued by th€ respondent during the pendency of the above writ petition.
Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI SHAIK JEELANI BASHA, \DVOCATE FOR SRI B.SRINIVAS
Counsel for the Respondents : GP FOR COMMERCIAL 1l ,X
The Court made the following ORDER
.i
//' .,1/
I
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE STJDDALA CHALAPATHT RAO
W.P.No.19288 OF 2008
$DEB,(per Hon'bleSri.IusticeP.SamKoshy)
Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, Mr.Shaik
Jeelani Basha, leamed counsel representing Mr.B.Srinivas, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the matter has since become infrucfuous.
stands dismissed as infiuctuous. There shall be no orderas to costs.
Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall
stand closed.
SD/-M. NAGAMANI ASSIS NT REGISTRAR
//TRUE COPY//
c ON OFFICER
To
'1. Two CCs to GP FOR COMN/ERCIAL TAX, High Court for Slate of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT] 2. One CC to SRI B.SRINIVAS. Advocate [OPUC] 3. Two CD Copies SA BS
i
HIGH COURT
DATED:0910912025
._ - i:.:a 'r:--. -
./--a . , ta. ',,,
.zi'('t
)1.
ti; 1! BE; rus
'.)
ORDER
WP.No.19288 of 2008
DISMISSING THE W.P
AS INFRUCTUOUS WITHOUT COSTS.
v
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the garnishee notice dated 01-09-2008 under Section 29 of the APVAT Act was illegal — left undecided as the petition became infructuous.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
M/s. Electronics Corporation of India Ltd., rep. by its Accounts Manager Sri V. Venkateswarlu
The Assistant Commissioner (CT) LTU and Int, Saroornagar Division
P. Sam Koshy
Suddala Chalapathi Rao
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
