Posted On by &filed under Allahabad High Court, High Court.


Allahabad High Court
M/S Shaktiman Cements Ltd. vs State Of U.P. & Ors. on 4 August, 2010
Court No. - 37

Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 1092 of 2010

Petitioner :- M/S Shaktiman Cements Ltd.
Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Ors.
Petitioner Counsel :- Ved Prakash Singh
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C

Hon'ble Rajes Kumar,J.

Hon’ble Bharati Sapru,J.

Connect with Writ Tax No. 137 of 2010.

Heard Sri V.P. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri A.
C. Tripathi, learned Standing Counsel.

By means of present petition, the petitioner is challenging the levy
of transit fee, which is being demanded by the respondents. The
case of the petitioner is that he is importing coal, which is not
forest produce. It is also the case of the petitioner that he is not
transporting the product through forest, therefore, the demand of
transit fee is not justified.

learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the decision of
this Court in the case of Kanhaiya Singh and another Vs. State of
U.P. and others has been challenged before the Apex Court in
Special Leave to Appeal. In Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No.
11367 of 2007 Kanhaiya Singh and another Vs. State of U.P. and
others, the realization of transit fee has been stayed but the said
order has been subsequently modified by the Apex Court on
10.12.2008 and Apex Court directed to maintain a separate
account. In the light of the aforesaid orders, this Court while
entertaining the writ petition has passed the order dated 4.3.2009
directing the respondents to maintain a separate account in respect
of the money collected from the petitioners towards transit fee on
various forest produce brought within the territories of the State of
U.P. but the realization of transit fee has not been stayed. He
submitted that against the said order Special Leave to Appeal
(Civil) No. 11923 of 2009 has been filed. The Apex Court has
entertained the petition on 15.5.2009 and connected the matter
with Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No. 11367 of 2007 Kanhaiya
Singh and another Vs. State of U.P. and others and till the final
disposal of the matter, recovery proceeding has been stayed. In
view of the aforesaid order passed by the Apex Court, he
submitted that in the present case the recovery proceeding be
stayed.

Sri A.C. Tripathi, learned Standing Counsel submitted that the
interim order may be passed in the light of the order passed by the
Apex Court.

In view of the above, we pass the following order:

“Learned Standing Counsel prays for and is granted four weeks
time to file counter affidavit. Rejoinder affidavit may be filed
within two weeks thereafter.

List thereafter.

Till the next date of listing, the recovery of transit fee against the
petitioner shall remain stayed provided the petitioner furnishes
security in the form of bank guarantee. The respondents are further
directed to maintain a separate account in respect of the petitioner.

Order Date :- 4.8.2010
OP


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

8 queries in 0.107 seconds.