Case Law Research

The Supreme Court of India : STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH VS THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND ORS ETC : 1st December, 2016

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).11735-11740 OF 2016
(@SLP(C) NO(S).1125-1130 OF 2016)

STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH      
APPELLANT

VERSUS

THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME
TAX AND ORS ETC
RESPONDENTS

WITH
CIVIL APPEAL NO.11741 OF 2016
(@SLP(C) NO.1994 OF 2016)

CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).11742-11743 OF 2016
(@SLP(C) NO(S).2142-2143 OF 2016)

CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).11744-11745 OF 2016
(@SLP(C) NO(S).2124-2125 OF 2016)

CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).11747-11762 OF 2016
(@SLP(C) NO(S).2817-2832 OF 2016)

CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).11763-11764 OF 2016
(@SLP(C) NO(S).4817-4818 OF 2016)

CIVIL APPEAL NO.11765 OF 2016
(@SLP(C) NO.2206 OF 2016)

CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).11766-11767 OF 2016
(@SLP(C) NO(S).4799-4800 OF 2016)

CIVIL APPEAL NO.11768 OF 2016
(@SLP(C) NO.6871 OF 2016)

CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).11769-11771 OF 2016
(@SLP(C) NO(S).8461-8463 OF 2016)

 

J U D G M E N T

KURIAN, J.

Leave granted.

The appellants are before this Court aggrieved by  the  interim  order passed by the High Court of Judicature at Andhra Pradesh for  the  State  of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh dated 16.12.2015 in WVMP  Nos.1688 & 2546 of 2015 and connected matters. The operative  portion  of  the  order reads as follows :

“The petitioners herein and the  Government  of  A.P  shall  forthwith and, in any event, on or before 20.01.2016, re-deposit the amounts  received by them from APBCL on the sale of the stocks (beer, FL  and  IMFL)  attached by the Income-tax department. Such re-deposit would ensure that  the  entire sale proceeds (ie Rs.489.07 crores les the TDS of Rs.4.81 crores) remain  in the separate account directed to be maintained by this Court. The  interests of the petitioners, the Income Tax Department, and the Government of  Andhra Pradesh would be secured thereby as, after the Writ  Petitions  are  finally heard and decided, these amounts can be paid to those entitled thereto.”
When  the  matter  came  up  before  this  Court,  vide  order  dated 01.02.2016, it was ordered that as far as the amount of  Rs.  489.07  crores liability of tax is concerned, there shall be no  coercive  steps  till  the next date of hearing.


Having heard  Mr.  P.  Chidambaram,  Mr.  Pallav  Shishodia,  learned Senior Counsel for the appellant(s) and Mr. Ranjit Kumar, learned  Solicitor General, Mr. Basava Prabhu  S.  Patil,  learned  Senior  Counsel  and  other learned counsel appearing for the respondents, we are of the  view  that  it is not necessary for this Court, at this  stage,  to  go  into  the  various disputed contentions  raised  by  the  parties  on  merits  since  the  Writ Petitions are pending before the High Court. We find that the deposit is  to be made mainly by the State of Andhra Pradesh.


Therefore, we dispose of these appeals with  a  request  to  the  High Court to dispose of the Writ Petitions expeditiously and  preferably  before ensuing summer vacation.


In case the  Writ  Petitions  are  dismissed,  the  appellants  shall, subject to the orders passed by the High Court and subject to  those  orders attaining finality, deposit the amounts as ordered by the High Court  within a period of one month, with interest as fixed by the High Court.


Since the High Court has passed only an  interim  order,  we  make  it clear that all contentions are left open and the  Writ  Petitions  shall  be disposed of uninfluenced by any of the  observations  and  findings  in  the interim order.


Till the Writ petitions are disposed  of  by  the  High  Court,  there should be no recovery of the dues in terms of the impugned order.


...........................J.
(KURIAN JOSEPH)


..........................J.
(AMITAVA ROY)

NEW DELHI,
DECEMBER 01, 2016

Last modified on Monday, 02 January 2017 08:56

Additional Info

  • Date Range: Thursday, 01 December 2016
  • Court/Authority: Supreme Court
  • Tax Type: Income Tax/Cap Gains/Wealth T
  • Petitioner/Appellant: STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH VERSUS THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND ORS ETC
  • Respondent: STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH VERSUS THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND ORS ETC
  • Appl no. or Appl year: CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).11735-11740 OF 2016 (@SLP(C) NO(S).1125-1130 OF 2016)
  • Supreme Court Location: Delhi
  • AAR Location: Delhi
  • Authority: Supreme Court

A New Feature :

Advanced Case Law Search

 

7th April, 2016

The “Advanced Case Law Search” feature in TaxQuotient  enables search on separate parameters such as Court, Tax Type, Date (from & to Range), appellant, respondent and even keywords. This helps you in locating case law you are searching for swiftly.

TIP: #1 : If you want to view the latest cases, just enter the start and end dates keeping all other boxes blank. You will get a list of all available indirect tax cases during that period.

TIP # 2 : Please keep the date range (start to end date) for upto 6 months.

TIP # 3 : Don't forget to reset the search to clear the earlier results before a new search.

Click to enter Advanced Case Law Search

 GST Bill passed by Parliament

 

 

 

The 122nd Constitution Amendment Bill introduced in Parliament in December 2014 has been passed by the Rajya Sabha and now also by the Lok Sabha with the amendments.  Now the Bill must get ratified by at least half the number of 31 State Legislatures which means 16 States and then finally get the approval from the President.

Thereafter the GST Council has to be set up which will determine the GST design at the granular level. This will include the structure of GST including scope of CGST, SGST and IGST, the taxes subsumed, the items/commodities covered and other critical aspects such as the threshold limits for taxability, exemptions, and several other parameters critical for an ideal  GST.

Further, for the GST to operate smoothly, the taxes paid on goods and services at every stage in the value chain needs to be tracked. This requires an IT infrastructure which will track the transactions and taxes paid and form the back-bone of GST. Reportedly considerable work has been already done on it, nevertheless it will need changes to correctly reflect the GST Law proposed by the GST Council and accepted by the Central & State Legislatures.

Last but not the least,  the tax authorities and other stakeholders who will implement the GST need to be trained for a smooth introduction.

Seven questions to know if you 

are paying taxes 

correctly?

If you are the CFO or the Tax Head you ought to read this. Click Here

CESTAT Updates

June- July 2016

 

Brief update on CESTAT judgements passed during June 2016 to July 2016. Please note this update is not a summary of the cases but only leads on important issues decided. The links to the judgments are also provided for the full text.

Click here for update

Our Main Services 

in Indirect Taxes

 

  • Business structuring and tax planning
  • Review of end-to-end business processes for indirect taxes
  • Strategy to prevent litigation, representation and litigation support
  • Tax compliance and tax control framework
  • Support on specific issues
Go to top