Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2001 DIGILAW 644 (AP)

VETSTAR AGROS PVT. LTD. v. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, JEEDIMETLA CIRCLE, R. R. DIST. , HYDERABAD.

2001-06-28

S.ANANDA REDDY, S.R.NAYAK

body2001
JUDGMENT S. R. NAYAK, J. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Special Government Pleader for Taxes. The writ petition was disposed of finally with their consent. The short question that falls for our consideration and decision in this writ petition is whether the authorities of Commercial Tax Department can demand the tax and force the petitioner to pay the tax so long as the final eligibility certificate issued by the General Manager, District Industries Centre, Balanagar, R.R. District, the second respondent herein, dated November 3, 1997 stands and operates on the ground that the commercial production commenced anterior to the date specified in the final eligibility certificate. It cannot be gainsaid that by virtue of the final eligibility certificate issued by the General Manager, the petitioner-assessee is entitled to seek benefit of the certificate. In the first place, the authorities of the Commercial Tax Department are not appropriate authorities who are armed with necessary power to cancel or modify the final eligibility certificate issued by the General Manager. If the officers of the Commercial Tax Department have any credible information that the petitioner commenced the commercial production anterior to the date specified in the final eligibility certificate, they may pass on the same to the General Manager who is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner. The first respondent without resorting to such lawful procedure and method high-handedly cannot coerce the petitioner to pay the tax ignoring the final eligibility certificate. In that view of the matter, we dispose of this writ petition directing the first respondent not to coerce the petitioner to pay the tax so long as the final eligibility certificate issued by the General Manager, dated November 3, 1997 is not cancelled or modified by him. Although, the learned counsel for the petitioner requested the court to issue a direction to the first respondent to return the tax collected by him, we think the appropriate procedure for the petitioner is to make necessary application in terms of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act before the first respondent and seek refund. No costs. Petition allowed.