2020 (6) TMI 388

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ioner has approached this Court by filing the present Writ Petition - HELD THAT:- Since it is not disputed by the learned Special Counsel for Commercial Tax that petitioner had already deposited 2/3rds of the disputed tax, and since admittedly appeal filed by petitioner before the Telangana VAT Tribunal is still pending and if the balance tax is also permitted to be receoved, the very appeal would .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rder No.2585 dt.31-01-2017 holding that petitioner is liable to pay VAT. 3. This was challenged by the petitioner in a Statutory Appeal No.PV/82/2017-18 before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (Court), Punjagutta Division disputing the levy of tax of ₹ 1,17,42,532/- along with stay application. 4. However, the said application was rejected by the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT) on .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 8. Ultimately, the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT) dismissed the main appeal by order dt.16-03-2019. 9. This was challenged by the petitioner before the Telangana VAT Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad by filing T.A.No.98 of 2019. The same is still pending. 10. The petitioner filed an application before the Additional Deputy Commissioner (CT) under Section 31(3)(c) of the A.P. VAT Act, 200 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X