2022 (6) TMI 1039

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....mus setting aside the impugned proceedings passed by the second respondent dated 29.07.2021 passed in S.No.11/2021-22/GNT vide ADC Order No.ZH370721OD57067 passed for the assessment year 2010-11 (CST) in rejecting the appeal for non deposit of 12.5% of the disputed tax in terms of third proviso to Section 21(1) of the APVAT Act, 2005, as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to the provisions of the APVAT Act and Rules, 2005, and also contrary to the decision of this Hon'ble Court, or to pass...." 3. It may not be necessary for us to go into the facts in detail. As seen from the record, after finalizing the assessment for the year 2010-2011, the petitioner herein made an application for reopening of the assessment on the ground that the petitioner....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ending that when the statute provides for payment of 12.5% when an appeal is preferred, dispensing with the same may not be proper. 8. In order to appreciate the same, it will be appropriate to extract Section 31(1), 31(2) and 31(3)(a) of A.P. VAT Act, which reads as under:- "Section 31(1) Any VAT dealer or TOT dealer or any other dealer objecting to any order passed or proceeding recorded by any authority under the provisions of the Act other than an order passed or proceeding recorded by an Additional Commissioner or Joint Commissioner or Deputy Commissioner, may within thirty days from the date on which the order or proceeding was served on him, appeal to such authority as may be prescribed: Provided that the appellate authority ma....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... than an order passed by Additional Commissioner or Joint Commissioner or Deputy Commissioner, may within 30 days from the date of order or proceeding 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." The word "any order" referred to in Section 31 cannot be limited only to assessment orders. If that was the intention of the Legislature, the same would have been incorporated therein. 10. The next issue is with regard to payment of 12.5% of the difference of tax assessed by the authority prescribed at the time of preferring the appeal. A reading of material placed before the Court does not show that the dispute or the lis between the pa....