M/S. Sodexo India Services Pvt. ... vs The Additional Commissioner Ct,
2021 Latest Caselaw 5400 AP

    HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI


      HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH
                          AND
         HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE B. S. BHANUMATHI


              WRIT PETITION No.30119 OF 2021



M/s Sodexo India Services Pvt Ltd
earlier known as Sodexo Food Solutions India P Ltd Rep by its
Authorised Signatory Mr Abhishek Pundir 162338A Parvati
Towers 2nd Floor New Dairy Centre Pallamraju Nagar
Kakinada533001

                                      ...         Petitioner

                             Versus

1. The Additional Commissioner CT
   Legal Office of the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes
   Edupugallu Vijayawada Andhra Pradesh 521151

2. The Appellate Deputy Commissioner CT
   Vijayawada Division Moghalrajapuram Vijayawada

3. The Assistant Commissioner CT
   Audit 10355 RamanayyaPeta Kakinada East Godavari District
   AP

4. The State of Andhra Pradesh
   Rep by its Principal Secretary Revenue CTII Department
   Secretariat Buildings Velagapudi Amaravathi Guntur District

                                      ...       Respondents

Counsel for the petitioner : Mr. S. Dwarakanath, Senior Advocate, along with Mr. K.Srinivasa Rao, Advocate

Counsel for the respondents : Mr. Y. N. Vivekananda, Government Pleader, Commercial Tax

ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 21.12.2021

(Per Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah)

Heard Mr. S. Dwarakanath, learned Senior Counsel along

with Mr. K. Srinivasa Rao, learned counsel and

Mr. Y. N. Vivekananda, learned Government Pleader, Commercial

Tax, for the respondents.

2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the CTD order No.ACO

ZH3712210D11000 dated 01.12.2021 of the respondent no.1,

which was received by him on 02.12.2021, directing him to

deposit 50% of the penalty of Rs.4,80,30,310/- as imposed by

the respondent no.3 for the period April, 2015 to June, 2017

under Section 31(3)(b) of the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax

Act, 2005 ( for short, the 'Act' ).

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

dispute relates to the hospitality services, which the petitioner

has rendered for the said period. It was submitted that the said

services were also on Oil Rigs located on high seas, which is

beyond the jurisdiction of the authority concerned. However, it

was further pointed out that the same issue for an earlier period

is also pending consideration before the authorities, in which the

order is of 25% penalty, but for the present period, the authority

has levied penalty of 100%, which is arbitrary and further, there

is a direction to pay 50% of the penalty, for stay of the remaining

penalty amount during the pendency of the appeal filed by the

petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the

authority has exercised its jurisdiction as available under

Section 31(3)(b) of the Act, which is neither unreasonable nor

illegal. However, it was submitted that the petitioner has paid

only 50% of the tax but only 12.5% of the penalty and should be

directed to pay additional amount.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

petitioner would pay another 12.5% of the penalty amount

within six weeks from today and the respondent no.2, before

whom the appeal is pending may be directed to decide the appeal

finally.

6. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case

and submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, taking

overall view in the matter, the writ petition stands disposed of in

the following terms:

i) The petitioner shall pay an additional 12.5% of the

penalty amount by 31.01.2022.

ii) Further, the respondent no.2 shall hear appeal

No.KKD/03/2021-22 dated 05.07.2021 and dispose of

the same expeditiously and latest within a period of

three months from today, after giving opportunity of

hearing to the petitioner.

7. It is clarified that the Court has not expressed any opinion

on the merits of the matter.

8. In case, the additional 12.5% of the penalty amount is not

deposited by the petitioner by 31.01.2022, it shall be open to the

authorities to proceed for recovery of the remaining amount, as

per the impugned order, in accordance with law.

9. There shall be no order as to costs.

10. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending also stand disposed

of.

________________________________ (AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH,J)

________________________ (B. S. BHANUMATHI,J)

Note:

Issue C.C. on 22.12.2021 B/o.

Pab

HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH AND HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE B. S. BHANUMATHI

WRIT PETITION No.30119 OF 2021

Date : 21-12-2021

Pab