9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (6) TMI 1039X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y Commissioner, may within 30 days from the date on which the order or proceeding was served on him, appeal to such authority as may be prescribed. It is to be noted here that the word used is 'any order' passed and not 'order of assessment'. Hence, the argument of the learned Government Pleader that appeal itself may not lie cannot be accepted. The word 'any order' referred to in Section 31 cannot be limited to only assessment orders. If that was the intention of the Legislature, the same would have been incorporated therein. In the absence of the same, the endorsement made by the Assistant Commissioner on 21.11.2019 can be challenged in an appeal. Payment of 12.5% of the difference of tax assessed by the author ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e proper. The impugned order is set aside, directing the 2nd respondent-Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), Tirupati, to entertain the appeal of the petitioner against the endorsement of the respondent No.1 Commercial Tax Officer, Lalapet Circle, Guntur, dated 28.9.2020, and deal with the appeal without insisting on payment of 12.5% of disputed tax, in accordance with the law - Petition allowed. - WRIT PETITION No. 25597 OF 2021 - - - Dated:- 6-4-2022 - THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.PRAVEEN KUMAR AND THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA ORDER ( Per Hon ble Sri Justice C. Praveen Kumar ) Heard Sri S.Suribabu, learned counsel for the petitioner, and the learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax appearing for the resp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8.9.2020, the petitioner herein preferred an appeal before respondent No.2, which was rejected on the ground that the petitioner failed to pay 12.5% of the disputed tax at the time of preferring the appeal. 5. The operative portion of the said order reads as under:- Considering the provisions of Section 31(1) of APVAT Act, the appellant has to furnish proof of payment of 12.5% of the disputed tax along with the appeal. But, the appellant has not furnished any proof for both the appeals despite issuing check memos. Therefore, the appeals filed by the appellant are hereby rejected. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the issue involved in the present writ petition is squarely covered by an order, dated 04.12. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... alf percent of the difference of the tax assessed by the authority prescribed and the tax admitted by the appellant, for the relevant tax period, in respect of which the appeal is preferred. (2) The appeal shall be in such form, and verified in such manner, as may be prescribed and shall be accompanied by a fee which shall not be less than Rs. 50/- (Rupees Fifty only) but shall not exceed Rs. 1,000/- (Rupees One thousand only) as may be prescribed. (3)(a) Where an appeal is admitted under sub-section (1), the appellate authority may, on an application filed by the appellant and subject to furnishing of such security or on payment of such part of the disputed tax within such time as may be specified, order stay of collection of b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orms but the request before the authority was only to receive H Forms, which he has received at a belated stage, but the same was rejected. The same does not relate to collection of tax or payment of tax as the assessment was complete and the same was not challenged. 11. Further, the proviso categorically states that an appeal shall not be admitted by the appellate authority unless the dealer produced proof of payment of tax admitted to be due and proof of payment of 12.5% of difference of tax assessed by the authority prescribed and the tax admitted by the appellant for the relevant tax period in respect of which appeal is preferred. Here, the appeal does not relate to imposing tax for the relevant tax period, but for a different purp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
