Home Case Index All Cases VAT and Sales Tax VAT and Sales Tax + HC VAT and Sales Tax - 2014 (12) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (12) TMI 1346 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxMaintainability of petition - failure to fulfill the requirement of pre-deposit - second proviso to Section 31 of the A.P. VAT Act - HELD THAT - As has been held by this Court, in its order in M/s. MBS Impex Pvt. Ltd Judgment 2014 (10) TMI 1006 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT , the power available to the Supreme Court under Article 142 of the Constitution of India is not available to the High Court and, in the light of the Division bench Judgment in Ankamma Trading Company 2011 (2) TMI 1254 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT , this Court would not be justified in passing any order contrary thereto. Petition dismissed.
Issues:
1. Pre-deposit of disputed tax under Section 31 of A.P. VAT Act. 2. Rejection of appeal by the 3rd respondent. 3. Request for reconsideration of judgments in light of Supreme Court order. 4. Jurisdiction of High Court under Article 142 of the Constitution of India. Analysis: 1. The petitioner had paid 12.5% of the disputed tax as required by the second proviso to Section 31 of the A.P. VAT Act after their appeal was rejected by the 3rd respondent. The rejection was based on previous judgments like Ankamma Trading Company and M/s. MBS Impex Pvt. Ltd, which the petitioner argued should be reconsidered following a subsequent Supreme Court order dated 05.09.2014 in Civil Appeal No.8495-8497 of 2014. The petitioner sought disposal of the Writ Petition to enable approaching the Supreme Court for relief. 2. The Supreme Court's order in Civil Appeal No.8495-8497 of 2014 was made under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, a power not available to the High Court. The High Court, citing its previous judgment in M/s.MBS Impex Pvt. Ltd, reiterated that it cannot exercise the same powers as the Supreme Court. In line with the Division Bench Judgment in Ankamma Trading Company, the High Court concluded that it could not pass any order contrary to its previous decisions. Consequently, the Writ Petition was dismissed, and any related miscellaneous petitions were also dismissed, with no costs imposed.
|