M/S.Mba Motors, v. The State Of Telangana,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD

FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH MONDAY, TWENTY NINETH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND FIFTEEN PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KONDANDA RAM W.P. No.17395 of 2015 Between:

M/s. MBA Motors ... Petitioner And The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue (CT-II) Department, Telangana Secretariat, Hyderabad and others.

... Respondents

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KONDANDA RAM W.P. No.17395 of 2015 ORDER: (Per the Hon'ble Sri CKR, J) The order dated 20.05.2015 passed by the Joint Commissioner (CT) - II, refusing to grant stay pending appeal is challenged before this Court for the period April, 2007 to March, 2013.

Assessment was finalized and underdeclaration of VAT of Rs.3,56,918/- was found. This was mainly on account of the disallowance input tax credit on purchase of certain ineligible goods/vehicles by the dealer and also restricting the input tax credit to 90% / 75% of purchase of spares/lubricants etc., Assessee challenged the order of the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Miryalaguda, by filing appeal before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), Hyderabad. Pending disposal of the appeal, assessee sought stay of collection of the disputed tax. Petitioner set out in his application and also urged before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner, how the order of the assessment was prima facie unsustainable and sought stay.

The Joint Commissioner did not advert to any of the grounds raised by the petitioner and also did not disclose why the stay petition filed by the petitioner is not required to be considered. The order passed by the Joint Commissioner is laconic and a non-speaking order. This Court had deprecated the practice of passing of non-speaking orders even without adverting to the contentions raised by the parties. In the facts of the present case, though there is something for us to say, we refrain from making any observations with regard to the merits of the matter for the reason appeal is already pending before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), Hyderabad.

However, in the facts of the present case we consider it appropriate to stay the operation of the assessment order giving effect to the assessment order pending disposal of the appeal by the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), Hyderabad, on the condition of petitioner paying 50% of the disputed amount within a period of 8 weeks from today. If any amounts are paid already the same shall be given credit for the purpose of arriving at 50% of the amount directed to be deposited. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, stands dismissed. __________________________________ JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH ___________________________________ JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM Date: 29.06.2015 LSK