2020 (4) TMI 887

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... filed against the assessment order, and since no tax is quantified under the endorsement, held that the insistence of the authorities to pay 12.5 per cent of the disputed tax as a condition precedent for entertaining the appeal against the endorsement is untenable. The second respondent is directed to entertain the appeal of the petitioner against the endorsement of the first respondent, without insisting for payment of 12.5 per cent of disputed tax - petition allowed.
J. K. MAHESHWARI C. J. and NINALA JAYASURYA J. K. Srinivasa Rao for the petitioner. Government Pleader For Commercial Taxes , for the respondent. ORDER This writ petition is filed seeking a direction to the second respondent-Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), Tirupati .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... o accept the same. While matters stood thus, in view of the judgment of the Appellate Tribunal in T. A. No. 167/2016, dated January 8, 2019, the petitioner requested the first respondent to take H forms and grant relief. However, the first respondent returned all the H forms and proof of direct exports vide endorsement dated October 15, 2019. Challenging the said endorsement of the first respondent, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the second respondent within time. The second respondent, however, issued check Memo No. 105-A/2019-20, dated January 23, 2020 requiring the petitioner to show proof of payment of 12.5 per cent. of the disputed tax. The petitioner addressed a communication to the second respondent that since the appeal i .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ove order of the Division Bench of this court squarely applies to the facts and circumstances of the present case and the learned Government Pleader for Commercial Taxes fairly accepts the same. 6. In such view of the matter, we are inclined to dispose of the present writ petition taking into consideration of the orders passed by the Division Bench of this court in W. P. No. 12362 of 2019 dated September 13, 2019 (Sri Hari Maharalayam Company v. Commercial Tax Officer [2021] 86 GSTR 182 (AP)) and the submissions made by both the parties. 7. As a result, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned endorsement vide check memo No. 105-A/2019-20 dated January 23, 2020 issued by the second respondent is hereby set aside. The second responden .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X