TMI Blog2021 (6) TMI 584X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the petitioner herein in the grounds of appeal are required to be gone into by the Tribunal under Section 33 of the APVAT Act, this Court does not find any justification on the part of the 1st respondent in declining to consider the request of the petitioner herein by going into merits of the appeal. Petition allowed. - WRIT PETITION No. 8253 of 2021 - - - Dated:- 16-4-2021 - HON BLE SRI JUSTICE A.V. SESHA SAI AND HON BLE MS JUSTICE J. UMA DEVI Petitioner and Advocate : Karthik Ramana Puttamreddy Respondent and Advocate : GP For Commercial Tax Order : (Per Hon ble Sri Justice A.V. Sesha Sai) In the present writ petition, challenge is to the order passed by the Joint Commissioner (CT), Legal, Office of the Commissio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sum equivalent to 37.5% of disputed tax. Pending the said appeal, the petitioner filed stay application dated 27.02.2020 before the 1st respondent-Joint Commissioner, under clause (a) of sub-section (6) of Section 33 of APVAT Act 2005. The Joint Commisisioner-1st respondent herein vide impugned proceedings dated 22.01.2021 dismissed the said application. This writ petition challenges the validity and legal sustainability of the said order passed by the 1st respondent, declining to grant stay. 4. Heard Sri Dwarakanath, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri T.C.D. Sekhar, learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax for the respondents. 5. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the 1st respondent herein gr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing reasons and exercised the jurisdiction under Section 33(6)(a) of the APVAT Act, 2005, in the absence of any perversity, the impugned order does not warrant any interference of this Court. 7. In the above background, now the issues that emerge for consideration of this Court are : 1) Whether the order passed by the 1st respondent- Joint Commissioner, dated 22.01.2021, declining to grant stay pending appeal before the Tribunal under Section 33 of the APVAT Act, 2005 is sustainable and tenable? and 2) Whether the same warrants any interference of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India? 8. The information available before this Court manifestly discloses that as against the order passed by the assessing a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stainability of the orders impugned in the appeal filed before the Tribunal under Section 33 of the APVAT Act and in the event of insistence on the petitioner to deposit the entire amount the very purpose of filing the appeals would be frustrated. 12. A perusal of the memo of grounds of appeal, which forms a part of this writ petition as a material paper, shows that the petitioner herein raised a number of contentions in the appeal pending before the Tribunal, which ultimately go into the root of the matter. Since the petitioner herein has already deposited 50% of the disputed tax amount i.e., 12.5% before the first appellate authority and 37.5% before the Tribunal and also deposited another 50% while filing the appeals before the first ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
