M/S. Sarala Project Works Private Limited, v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Service Tax,
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM W.P.No.37106 of 2017 Between:
M/s. Sarala Project Works Private Limited, 6-3-1186/5/A, Amogh Plaza, Fourth floor, Hyderabad Represented by its Managing Director Mr.D.Ramalinga Raju ...
Petitioner And
1. The Assistant Commissioner of Service Tax, Division-3, Range-2, Circle IV (Audit), Hyderabad Service Tax Commissionerate, Hyderabad.
2. The Additional Commissioner of Service Tax, O/o. Principal Chief Commissioner, Service Tax Commissionerate, 11-5-423/1/A, Sitaram Prasad Tower, Redhills, Hyderabad.
3. The Additional Commissioner of Service Tax (Audit), O/o. Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax, Audit Commissionerate, Hyderabad, L.B.Stadium, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad.
4. The Assistant Commissioner of Service Tax, Circle IV (Audit), O/o. Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax, Audit Commissionerate, Hyderabad, L.B. Stadium, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad. ...
Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner :
Mr.Bhaskar Reddy Vemireddy Counsel for the Respondents:
--------- The Court made the following:
Order: (Per the Hon'ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy) This writ petition is filed for the following substantial relief: "For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, the petitioner herein prays that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in passing the impugned order in Original No.22/2017 dated 09.06.2017 which was served on the petitioner on 03.10.2017 for the assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 under Finance Act 1994 as illegal, arbitrary, high handed, without authority of law and jurisdiction and in violation of principles of natural justice and set aside the same and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case".
2.
Mr.P.Balaji Varma, representing Mr.Bhaskar Reddy Vemi Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that on instructions, the counsel seeks permission of the Court for withdrawal of the writ petition, with liberty to his client for availing the remedy of appeal.
3.
The writ petition is accordingly dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty to the petitioner in terms of the prayer made. ______________________ (C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy, J) _____________________ (Challa Kodanda Ram, J) Date: 13th November, 2017 msb