Back
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Nyapathy Vijay, J
Sono Vision – Appellant
Versus
State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner contests demand for advertisement tax on hoardings. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. tax levied based on intent to advertise. (Para 4 , 6) |
| 3. intent to solicit customers defines advertisement. (Para 5 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. court supports tax demand under statutory law. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 5. writ petition dismissed for lack of merit. (Para 11) |
ORDER:
1. The present Writ Petition is filed questioning the action of the Respondent No.2 in issuing Notice No.0128/2018/ACP-VI, dated Nil.02.2017 (signed on 31.01.2018) insisting the Petitioner to pay advertisement tax for the name boards/hoardings erected on the premises of the Petitioner, as illegal and arbitrary.
2. The facts leading to filing of the Writ Petition are as follows:-
The Petitioner is involved in the business of sale of electronic products and is running his business at various locations in the State. While so, a demand notice was issued to the Petitioner calling upon the Petitioner to pay Rs.15,644/- towards advertisement tax for the year 2017-2018 for the advertisement displayed by the Petitioner by way of hoardings/boards. It is stated that the hoardings/advertisements were erected by the Petitioner in their own premises and th
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
