M/S. Lokis Forest Inn vs. Assistant Commissioner (St)
Held
The Court noted that the learned counsel for the parties had reached a consensus. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of in terms of a previously passed order in W.P.No.3600 of 2024. The petitioner was directed to deposit 10% of the tax liability, as assessed by the Assessing Officer, with the Department within four weeks from the date of the order. The petitioner was also directed to approach the Tribunal within three months from its constitution or establishment. The Tribunal was then to decide the second appeal in accordance with the law. Further, subject to the deposit of 10% of the tax liability within the stipulated time, no coercive action was to be taken against the petitioner until the decision of the Tribunal in the second appeal. The Court explicitly stated that it had not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. No costs were awarded.
Facts
The petitioner, M/s. L.R. Forest Inn, represented by its proprietor, filed a writ petition challenging an order of the Appellate Joint Commissioner (ST) dated February 13, 2024, and an order of the Assistant Commissioner (ST) dated July 28, 2023. These orders pertain to the tax period July 2017 to March 2018. The petitioner sought to set aside these orders as illegal and contrary to settled law. The petition was filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. An interim application was also filed seeking a stay of further proceedings pursuant to the impugned orders, pending the disposal of the writ petition, citing potential severe loss and hardship to the petitioner.
Key Issues
1. Whether the orders passed by the 1st and 2nd Respondents are illegal and contrary to settled law, warranting their setting aside under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner argued that the orders were illegal and contrary to settled law. The respondents, represented by the Special Government Pleader for State Tax and the Deputy Solicitor General of India, did not present specific arguments in the judgment. Instead, the parties reached a consensus during the hearing.
Sections Cited
Section 226
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
[ 3430 ] HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Speciat Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE G.RADHA RANI WRIT PETITION NO: 35257 0F 2024 Between: !!1gr.Loji'.s Forest tnn, rep. by its_proprietor, Mr. L. Rajkiran Reddy, #3_.1 1_ 46711, Shiva Ganga Cotony, Ring Road', t_.B.NagJr, Hyderabad_s0O 074. l I I ...PETITIONER AND 1 2 3 4 Assistant commissioner (sr), Mahaboobnagar circre, Nargonda Division, Nalgonda.
Appellate Joint Commissioner (ST), Hyderabad Rural Division, Hyderabad.
State of Telanggl?, lep by its Chief Secretary, and Special Chief Secretary to covernment (FAC), State Tax Department, Secretaria't, HyOeriUiO-. - - - -- ' '- Unior of lndia, rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Government of rndia, 3rd Floor, Jeevan Deep Building, Sansad M-arg, New Delhi _ 110 001 . ...RESPONDENTS 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 a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction setting a
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Telangana High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.