M/S.Rajendra Paper Corporation vs. Commercial Tax Officer
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE U. DURGA PRASAD RAO AND HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE J. UMA DEVI
Writ Petition No.5298 of 2021
ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice U.Durga Prasad Rao)
In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus granting stay of collection of the disputed tax of Rs.15,15,924/- for the tax period from April 2016 to June 2017 arising pursuant to the assessment proceedings of 1st respondent, pending disposal of the appeal before the Andhra Pradesh VAT Appellate Tribunal vide A.R.No.28/2021. 2. The case of the petitioner is that the 1st respondent passed the Assessment Order dated 29.08.2019 under the A.P. Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (for short, ‘the VAT Act’) for the tax period April 2016 to June 2017 restricting the Input Tax Credit (ITC) to Rs.15,66,907/- as against the claim of Rs.30,82,831/-
Aggrieved, the petitioner filed appeal before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), Vijayawada and also sought for stay. The appellate authority rejected the stay application. The petitioner filed revision petition before 3rd respondent seeking stay of collection of the disputed tax and the said petition was also dismissed vide proceedings dated 21.10.2020 in CCT’s Ref LII(1)/167/2019. Subsequently the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), Vijayawada dismissed the appeal No.KKD/22/2019-20 by order dated 20.02.2021. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed appeal in A.R.No.28/2021 before the 2
A.P. VAT Appellate Tribunal, Visakhapatnam, which is pending. In the meanwhile, the 2nd respondent has initiated coercive steps for recovery of the disputed tax under the Revenue Recovery Act and issued Form I distraint order on 05.02.2021. Hence, the writ petition seeking the stay.
Heard Sri P.Girish Kumar, learned counsel for petitioner, and learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax representing the respondents.
The main plank of argument of the learned counsel for petitioner is that since his second appeal before the A.P. VAT Appellate Tribunal, Visakhapatnam is pending for consideration, if the 2nd respondent takes coercive measures in the meanwhile to recover the disputed tax, the appeal will become otious even if he ultimately succeeds. On this count, he sought for stay.
Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that out of the disputed tax of Rs.15,15,924/-, the petitioner paid Rs.1,89,500/- on 05.10.2019, Rs.3,00,000/- on 23.02.2021 and Rs.2,70,500/- on 24.02.2021 and thus, he has already paid 50% of the disputed tax.
Having regard to the prima facie force in the submission of the learned counsel for petitioner, this Writ Petition is allowed granting stay of collection of the balance of disputed tax pending disposal of the appeal before the A.P. VAT Appellate Tribunal, Visakhapatnam. No costs.
3
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending for consideration, if any, shall stand closed.
_________________________ U.DURGA PRASAD RAO, J
______________ J.UMA DEVI, J 16.03.2021 MVA
Reproduced from the public record of the Andhra Pradesh High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.