Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s. ROOPAMS, VIJAYAWADA, A.P. Versus THE STATE OF A.P., COMMERCIAL TAXES, HYD., AND 4 OTRS.

2016 (7) TMI 37 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT

Waiver of pre-deposit - appeal was pending before the tribunal - Section 33(6) of the Act read with Rule 39 of the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Rules, 2005 - claim of exemption by the retail dealers from even mentioning the date and description of the goods in the sale bills issued by them - Held that:- As the substantive appeal is still pending before the Tribunal, it would not be appropriate for us to examine the scope of Rule 26(1) of the Rules or to record any finding on whether Rule 26(1) .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

er’s request, that the impugned order passed by the Additional Commissioner must be set aside, necessitates rejection, it is made clear that, while paying the balance tax due in terms of the order passed by the revisional authority, the petitioner shall be given credit for the amount paid by them towards the tax due. - writ petition dismissed - Decided against the petitioner. - WRIT PETITION NO.19616 OF 2016 - Dated:- 21-6-2016 - SRI RAMESH RANGANATHAN AND SRI M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY, JJ. FOR THE .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

to tax under the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2005 ( the Act for brevity). The second respondent sought to revise the assessment order and issued show cause notice dated 31.10.2014 and, thereafter, passed a revisional order confirming the tax liability of ₹ 23,80,120/- and rejecting the exemption claimed by the petitioner for ₹ 1,90,40,962/-. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner carried the matter in appeal in T.A.No.126 of 2015, and the said appeal is said to be still pending on .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

submit that, as the petitioner is a retail dealer, Rule 26(1) of the Rules which requires the particulars to be mentioned in each invoice is not applicable; the fifth respondent erred in examining the matter on its merits; by passing an elaborate order, the fifth respondent had rendered the appeal pending before the Tribunal infructuous; and, as the substantive appeal is still pending on the file of the Tribunal, the revisional authority ought not to have considered the matter on its merits. Wh .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

or to record any finding on whether Rule 26(1) of the Rules exempts retail dealers from even mentioning the date and description of the goods in the sale bills issued by them. Suffice it to observe that the prima facie conclusion of the Additional Commissioner in this regard cannot be said to suffer from perversity necessitating exercise interference in proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Needless to state that the Tribunal shall examine the petitioner s claim, on the ina .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

(a) of the Act seeking stay of the disputed tax, the Additional Commissioner was bound to deal with all the contentions raised by the petitioner in their stay application, and record his prima facie conclusion. His failure to do so may have resulted in the petitioner complaining that the objections raised by them, in their stay petition was not even examined. Reliance placed, on behalf of the petitioner, on Section 33(6) of the Act to contend that the Additional Commissioner is bound to pass a c .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Commissioner to grant stay pending disposal of the appeal before the Tribunal either unconditionally or on such terms and conditions as he may think fit to impose. The power to grant stay would include the power to refuse to grant stay, and Section 33(6)(a) of the Act cannot be so understood as to mean that the Additional Commissioner is bound to grant stay, in each and every application filed before him, either conditionally or unconditionally. In the present case, the Additional Commissioner .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version