High Court for State of TelanganaWP/34387/2017disposed of no costs

M/S.Spads Polyplast Products (P) Ltd., v. The State Of Andhra Pradesh

2017-10-26V Ramasubramanian,Abhinand Kumar Shavili2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD

FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH The Hon'ble Sri Justice V.RAMASUBRAMANIAN and The Hon'ble Sri Justice ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI WRIT PETITION No.34387 OF 2017 Between:

M/ s.Spads Polyplast Products (P) Ltd., Rep. by its authorized representative Mr. K. Suryachander Rao, Manager, having its Office at 1st floor, Crystal Towers, Masab Tank, Hyderabadand works at : Survey No.227/ A, 227/ B, 227/ 6, Balusupadu road, Jaggaiahpet, Krishna District, A.P. ... Petitioner Vs.

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary Revenue (CT) Amaravati-Vijayawada and others.

.. Respondents For Petitioner : Sri Damodar Mundra For Respondents : G.P. for Revenue (AP) G.P. for Commercial Tax (AP)

VRS, J & AKS, J WP No.34387 of 2017 HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN AND HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI WRIT PETITION No.34387 OF 2017 ORDER: (per V. Ramasubramanian, J) The petitioner came up with the above writ petition challenging the notice of detention of the goods and the lorry on 07.10.2017. While directing the learned Special Standing Counsel to take notice, we passed an interim order for the release of the goods and the lorry, upon payment of tax alone, as it was claimed by the petitioner that a sum of Rs.66,00,000/ - was due from the department towards repayment.

2. It appears that pursuant to the interim order, the goods as well as the lorry have been released. Therefore, the petitioner has virtually succeeded.

3. However to the impugned notice, the petitioner has already sent a reply. It appears that another notice, dated 10.10.2017, has been sent. The petitioner may file a reply to the said notice within fifteen

(15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Thereafter, the respondents may pass orders in accordance with law after considering the objections.

4. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand dismissed. No order as to costs.

_____________________ V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN, J _______________________ ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J October 26, 2017 KTL