M/S ASIAN TIMBER ESTATES v. The State of Andhra Pradesh
WP/8696/2024 · 2025-01-22
Maheswara Rao Kuncheam, R Raghunandan Rao
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 13023 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 13023 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
1 RRR, J & MRK, J W.P.No.8696/2024
APHC010156152024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3508] THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SECONDN DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 8696/2024 Between: M/s Asian Timber Estates ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. LEO LAW ASSOCIATES LLP Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) Heard M/s. Leo Law Associates LLP, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned G.P. for Commercial Tax, appearing for the respondents. 2. The petitioner herein, which was registered under the AP VAT Act, 2005 had been served with the assessment order bearing A.O.No.142179
2 RRR, J & MRK, J W.P.No.8696/2024
dated 31.12.2018 for the tax period 01.11.2014 to 31.06.2017, by the C.T.O Morrispet Circle, Tenali, Guntur District. The petitioner submits that an appeal was filed against the assessment order and the same remained pending. 3. The petitioner contends that the respondent authorities, even during the pendency of the appeal, have initiated action for recovery of tax, by attachment of the bank account of the petitioner, maintained with the 5th respondent-bank, and that such action is clearly arbitrary, irrational and requires to be interdicted by this Court. 4. It is the case of the learned Government Pleader that a check Memo, dated 19.08.2023, was issued to the petitioner, calling upon the petitioner to show cause why the delay in filing of the appeal, against the penalty order, should be condoned. The learned Government Pleader, on instructions, submits that the petitioner has not chosen to appear before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner, despite service of such notice. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no such notice has been received. 6. Without going into the question whether notice has been received or not, time is granted to the petitioner to approach the Appellate Deputy Commissioner in this regard and file its objections within a period of two weeks from today. 3 RRR, J & MRK, J W.P.No.8696/2024
7. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.
________________________ R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J
______________________________ MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM, J Js. 4 RRR, J & MRK, J W.P.No.8696/2024
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO & THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM
W.P.No.8696 of 2024
(per Hon’ble Sri Justice R.Raghunandan Rao)
22nd January, 2025 JS