TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Dismissal of Writ Petition on Tax Notice Jurisdiction</h1> <h3>M/s. ITC Limited. Versus The State of Telangana</h3> M/s. ITC Limited. Versus The State of Telangana - TMI Issues:Challenging revised show cause notice under A.P. Tax on Luxuries Act, 1987.Analysis:The petitioner challenged a revised show cause notice issued under the A.P. Tax on Luxuries Act, 1987. The Supreme Court previously struck down Section 3A of the Act as unconstitutional. During the appeals, the Supreme Court ordered appellants to register under the Act and file returns, but not pay the tax. The Supreme Court observed that if luxury tax was collected during this period, it should be paid to the State Governments. Contempt petitions were filed against the petitioner for allegedly disobeying the Supreme Court's observation. Chartered Accountants were appointed to resolve factual disputes. The firm reported that the petitioner had not collected luxury tax for a specific period. The Supreme Court disposed of the contempt petitions, permitting show cause notices to be issued to respondents regarding unpaid luxury tax.Analysis:The 2nd respondent issued a revised show cause notice to the petitioner, who raised objections related to territorial jurisdiction. The petitioner contended that the show cause notice was issued by an authority not named in the Supreme Court's order and that the notice demanded tax from entities in different states post-bifurcation. The Court interpreted the Supreme Court's order, emphasizing the authority's competence to issue notices. The Court also discussed the jurisdiction issue post-state bifurcation and the applicability of Section 50 of the A.P. Reorganization Act, 2014. The petitioner argued against overlapping tax demands from different authorities.Analysis:The Court dismissed the writ petition, stating that challenges to show cause notices are limited, primarily dealing with jurisdiction issues. The Court clarified the interpretation of the Supreme Court's order, emphasizing the authority's competence to issue notices. The Court discussed the bifurcation of states and the applicability of relevant laws. The petitioner's objections to overlapping tax demands were noted, but the Court emphasized that this issue did not affect the jurisdiction of the respondent. The Court directed the petitioner to file objections to the show cause notice and allowed the respondent to proceed in accordance with the law and the Supreme Court's order.
TaxTMI 