Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
The Supreme Court bench in the instant case was considering an appeal against a judgment of the High Court which had dismissed some writ petitions following the decision of the coordinate bench of the High Court in the case Ankamma Trading Company Vs. Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), Guntur & Anr. and other decisions taking the same view, despite noticing that the supreme court had impliedly overruled by the Supreme Court in case M/s. Innovatives Systems, Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh. The instant case involves interpretation of the provisions of APGST Act, 1957 or AP VAT Act, 2005 or Telangana State VAT Act, 2005, as the case may be.
By placing reliance on the judgment in the case Kunhayammed Vs. State of Kerala, the appellant had pleaded that once a special leave petition has been granted, the doors of the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court have been let open. It also argued that any order passed thereafter would be an appellate order and the doctrine of merger would come into play. Also, it does not make a difference whether the order is one of reversal or of modification or of dismissal, or of affirming the order appealed against or if the order is a speaking or a nonspeaking one. The respondent defended the judgment of the High court contending that the judgment in M/s. Innovatives Systems vs. State of Andhra Pradesh is neither a specific provision nor has it expressly over turned the decision of the Division Bench of the High Court in Ankamma Trading Company.
The Supreme Court, however, rejected the contention of the respondents and noted that indeed the judgment in M/s Innovatives Systems is a brief judgment. However, that does not make any difference. The court reiterated that once an SPL has been allowed, the appellate jurisdiction of SC is open.
86540
103860
630
114
59824