9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (8) TMI 1482 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxMaintainability of petition - alternative remedy of appeal - HELD THAT - As a matter of fact, the petitioner has already preferred an Appeal in A.R.No.129/2013 before the STAT, Visakhapatnam but on account of financial stringency, the petitioner could not comply with the condition of pre-deposit. Considering the fact that the petitioner has already preferred an appeal in A.R.No. 129/2013 before the STAT, Visakhapatnam which is said to have been pending adjudication, we are inclined to dispose of the writ petition with the direction that petitioner shall comply with the condition of pre-deposit as provided under the relevant provisions of the Act, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, and on such compliance, the STAT, Visakhapatnam shall take the appeal in A.R.No. 129 / 2013 said to have been preferred by the petitioner, on file and dispose of the same on merits.
Issues:
Challenge to revisional order and revised proceedings by Commercial Tax Officer. Analysis: The writ petition was filed to challenge the revisional order dated 27.02.2013 passed by the Deputy Commissioner (CT) and the revised proceedings dated 25.03.2013 issued by the Commercial Tax Officer. The petitioner's counsel raised disputed questions challenging the validity of the revisional order, emphasizing the need to consider the facts on record. The High Court noted that the petitioner had an alternative remedy of appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal (STAT) as per the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957. The petitioner had already filed an appeal before the STAT, Visakhapatnam but failed to comply with the pre-deposit condition due to financial constraints. The Court considered the pending appeal and directed the petitioner to fulfill the pre-deposit condition within six weeks from the date of the order. Upon compliance, the STAT was instructed to take up the appeal for adjudication. The writ petition was disposed of with this direction, and no costs were awarded. Any pending Miscellaneous Petitions were also deemed disposed of as infructuous in light of the judgment.
|
