TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (7) TMI 782
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....orders were made available on the website of respondent No. 3 on August 23, 2013. On the very same day the petitioner filed revision petitions before respondent No. 2 as provided under section 31(3)(b) of the A.P. VAT Act and the same were posted to September 6, 2013 for hearing. In the meanwhile, by notice dated August 20, 2013 which was received by the petitioner by e-mail on August 21, 2013, respondent No. 5 called upon the petitioner to pay the entire tax payable under the assessment orders within three days, failing which coercive steps would be initiated without any further notice. The petitioner gave a reply dated August 21, 2013 bringing to the notice of respondent No. 5 that the revision petitions are pending before respondent No. 2 and requesting not to proceed with any coercive steps. In spite of the same, respondent No. 5 again issued a fresh recovery notice dated August 26, 2013 calling upon the petitioner to pay the tax within three days stating that their stay petitions were dismissed by respondent No. 3 on August 17, 2013. The petitioner again made a request by letter dated August 26, 2013 through his counsel not to proceed further since the hearing in their revisi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hority or the revisional authority is unjust, improper and arbitrary and keeping in view that respondent No. 2-revisional authority by order dated September 3, 2013 stayed the recovery of 50 per cent. of the disputed tax, this court while admitting the writ petitions passed an interim order dated October 10, 2013 directing respondent No. 5 to remit forthwith to the bank account of the petitioner 50 per cent. of the disputed tax which was already recovered. In compliance with the said interim order dated October 10, 2013 respondent No. 5 has admittedly remitted 50 per cent. of the disputed tax to the petitioner. Under the circumstances, it is submitted by the learned Senior Standing Counsel for Commercial Taxes appearing for the respondents that no further enquiry is necessary in the writ petitions and the same may be disposed of leaving it open to the third respondent-appellate authority to decide the petitioner's appeals in accordance with law. However, the learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners opposed the said proposal contending that the order of respondent No. 2, dated September 3, 2013 which was passed without assigning any reasons for imposing the condit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nce levied tax. Thus the second respondent thought it fit to grant subject to payment of 50 per cent. of the disputed tax. For proper appreciation, the relevant portion from the order dated September 3, 2013 may be reproduced hereunder: "The main issue involved in this case is under-declaration of tax by the appellant as determined by audit officer to an extent of Rs. 10,12,83,500 for 2009-10 and Rs. 24,84,418 for 2010-11. The Authorized Representative submitted that in the appellant's accounting software, they have multiple items mapped with the account of plant and machinery based on site location. If a particular item is moved/transferred from one telecom site to another telecom site of the company in the same State (or from one warehouse to another in the State), the earlier entry is reversed and new entry is passed based on the new location. Entries move in the same account of plant and machinery, only the location gets changed in the accounting software. Hence effect in the account of plant and machinery is nil due to these entries and therefore credit entries in the account of plant and machinery are only adjustment/rectification entries and not due to sale of plant an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion (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 balance of the tax under dispute pending disposal of the appeal; (b) against an order passed by the appellate authority refusing to order stay under clause (a), the appellant may prefer a revision petition within thirty days from the date of the order of such refusal to the Additional Commissioner or the Joint Commissioner who may subject to such terms and conditions as he may think fit, order stay of collection of balance of the tax under dispute pending disposal of the appeal by the appellate authority;" On a reading of the above provisions, it is apparent that the statute itself requires imposing terms and conditions while granting stay of collection of the disputed tax pending appeal and it is not permissible to pass an unconditional order. Having regard to the statutory power in exercise of which the orders dated August 17, 2013 and September 3, 2013 came to be passed and in view of the fact that the said orders are only interim orders pendin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to the Commissioner for consideration afresh. Thus, the facts and circumstances in Anwar Ali's case [1992] 196 ITR 354 (AP) are entirely different from the case on hand. As noticed above, the relief granted by the Division Bench of this court in the said decision was in the light of the scope and discretion conferred on the Commissioner under section 273A of the Income-tax Act. The other decision cited by the learned senior counsel, i.e., Kranti Associates Private Limited's case [2010] 9 SCC 496 is also in our considered opinion is distinguishable on facts. In the said case, a cryptic order passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission was assailed on the ground of absence of reasons. The impugned order passed by the National Commission while dismissing a revision was as under: "Heard. In view of the concurrent findings of the State Commission, we do not find any force in this revision petition. The revision petition is dismissed." After referring to various provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, the Supreme Court held that the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has the trappings of a civil court and is a high powered quasijudicial fo....