Ms.Shree Jagadamba Heavy Earthmovers And Engine Spare Parts, v. State Of Telangana

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTI CE SANJAY KUMAR AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTI CE T. AMARNATH GOUD TAX REVI SI ON CASE.No.2 8 of 2 0 1 9 ORDER:

This revision arises under Section 22 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957. The petitioner - assessee suffered a penalty order vide proceedings dated 15.03.2017 of the Commercial Tax Officer, Ramgopalpet Circle, Hyderabad. The penalty levied was to the tune of Rs.37,14,764/ -. Aggrieved thereby, it preferred an appeal before the Appellate Joint Commissioner (ST) (FAC), Panjagutta Division, Hyderabad.

2.

The said appeal was however dismissed at the admission stage on 14.12.2017. The petitioner thereupon carried the matter to the Telangana Value Added Tax Appellate Tribunal by way of TA.No.67 of 2018. By order dated 28.02.2019, the tribunal dismissed the appeal opining that as the petitioner had failed to pay the admitted penalty within the stipulate time, the law laid down by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh in M/ s.

An k am m a Tr adin g Com pan y , Tak k ellapadu v. Th e Appellat e Depu t y Com m ission er ( CT) Gu n t u r [ 2011 53 APSTJ 1] would be applicable and therefore, the petitioner could not seek relief contrary to the law laid down. 3.

Sri S. Krishna Murthy, learned counsel for the petitioner, fairly concedes that though the appeal preferred against the judgment of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh in M/ s. An k am m a Tr adin g Com pan y is still pending consideration before the Supreme Court and

interim suspension of the judgment under appeal was granted by the Supreme Court, such suspension would not have effect of putting in abeyance the principle of law laid down therein. It may be noted that a Division Bench of the combined High Court for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh in VI JAYA MI NI NG & I NFRA CORPORATI ON PRI VATE LI MI TED, KADAPA v .

THE COMMERCI AL TAX OFFI CER-1 , KADAPA 1 had an occasion to consider this very issue and rejected the contention that the ratio of the decision in M/ s. An k am m a Tr adin g Com pan y stood suspended by virtue of the suspension granted by the Supreme Court. 4.

We therefore find no error having been committed by the tribunal in applying the law laid down by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh in M/ s. An k am m a Tr adin g Com pan y. The revision is therefore devoid of merit and is accordingly dismissed. Pending miscellaneous petitions shall also stand dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.

______________ SANJAY KUMAR, J __________________ T. AMARNATH GOUD, J June 27, 2019 DSK 1 (2018) 66 APSTJ 54