Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Parle Products(P) Ltd vs State Of A.P on 2 February, 2015
Bench: Madan B. Lokur, Uday Umesh Lalit
1
CORRECTED
ITEM NO.5 COURT NO.10 SECTION III
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
I.A. 2-3/2015 in
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s).860-861/2014
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 14/06/2012
in WP No. 7962/2012,30/10/2013 in RWPMP No. 10768/2013,30/10/2013
in WP No. 7962/2012 passed by the High Court of A.P. at Hyderabad)
PARLE PRODUCTS(P) LTD Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
STATE OF A.P & ORS Respondent(s)
(for restoration and office report)
Date: 02/02/2015 These applications were called on for hearing
today.
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN B. LOKUR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Rajeev K. Virmani, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Sandeep Narain, Adv.
Ms. Arti Tiwari, Adv.
for M/s. S. Narain & Co.
For Respondent(s) Mr. P. Venkat Reddy, Adv.
Mr. Sumanth Nookala, Adv.
for M/s. Venkat Palwai Law Associates
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
We have heard learned counsel for the parties in the applications for restoration.
Applications for restoration are allowed subject to Signature Not Verified payment of Rs.5,000/- to the respondents within two Digitally signed by Sanjay Kumar Date: 2015.02.05 13:05:05 IST weeks from today.
Reason:The special leave petitions are restored to their original numbers.
2Delay condoned.
We have heard learned counsel for the parties on the merits of the case.
In the order dated 06.01.2014, it is recorded that 12.5% of the disputed tax has been deposited by the petitioner on 02.08.2011. The merits of the case were in dispute before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner, Punjagutta, Hyderabad where the petitioner's appeal No.A.R.Sl.No.C/32/2011 was filed.
Since 12.5% of the disputed tax has been paid, we think it appropriate to revive the appeal before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner, Punjagutta, Hyderabad and we direct accordingly.
The Appellate Deputy Commissioner shall now hear the appeal on merits.
We make it clear that we have not made any evaluation on the merits of the case.
The special leave petition is accordingly disposed of.
(SANJAY KUMAR-I) (RENU DIWAN) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER