1998 (8) TMI 558

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... carrying on business as a proprietary concern form December 1, 1974 in the premises belonging to the 3rd respondent. After the death of A. Jalaiah, the petitioner obtained fresh registration certificate from the Assistant Commercial Tax Officer. The 3rd respondent objected for the grant of the registration in favour of the son of late A. Jalaiah. Overruling the said objection the 1st respondent .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tention he also relied on a judgment of this Court in Smt. Samayamanthula Srihari v. Commercial Tax Officer [1993] 88 STC 446; (1992) 14 APSTJ 229. 3.. The learned counsel for the respondents contended that when he raised an objection before the Assistant Commercial Tax Officer not to grant registration in favour of the son of the deceased late Sri A. Jalaiah, overruling the objection the regist .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... : 5.. A reading of section 19 of Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957, makes it clear that it is only a dealer who is competent to file an appeal against any proceeding or order of an authority. It is undisputed that the 3rd respondent is not a dealer, therefore, he is not entitled to file an appeal against the order of the 1st respondent granting registration in favour of the petitioner. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X