HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.5683 of 2010 ORDER: (per Honourable Sri Justice Ramesh Ranganathan) Heard Sri Shaik Jeelani Basha, Learned Counsel for the petitioner, and Sri A.V.Krishna Kaundinya, Learned Special Standing Counsel for the Commercial Tax. At their request, the Writ Petition is disposed of at the admission stage. The petitioner is a proprietary concern carrying on business in Oxides, PVC pipe fittings and is a registered dealer on the rolls of the first respondent under the A.P. General Sales Tax Act (for short ‘the Act’). For the assessment year 2003-04, the first respondent completed assessment on 28.06.2004. Aggrieved by which the petitioner preferred an appeal to the Appellate Deputy Commissioner on 30.07.2004. The assessing authority, by proceedings dated 30.07.2004, passed penalty proceedings, under Section 14(8)(a) of the Act for Rs.12,03,790/- which is equivalent to five times of the disputed tax. Aggrieved thereby the petitioner preferred an appeal to the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), Vijayawada, who remanded both the appeals relating to assessment and penalty. While matters stood thus, the Joint Commissioner exercised his suo motu powers, under Section 20(2) of the Act, and confirmed the order of penalty passed by the assessing authority, vide his proceedings dated 29.09.2008. Aggrieved thereby the petitioner preferred an appeal to the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Visakhapatnam, on 30.01.2009. He filed an application seeking stay of collection of the disputed penalty in TMP.No.265 of 2009. The said miscellaneous petition was disposed of granting stay on condition of payment of 25% of the disputed penalty on or before 29.09.2009. The petitioner did not pay the said amount and instead approached this Court. This Court, by its order dated 11.03.2010, granted interim stay subject to the petitioner depositing 25% of the disputed amount on or before 30.04.2010 and observed that in default the stay granted would stand vacated. Thereafter the petitioner filed a petition seeking extension of stay and this Court, by its order dated 30.04.2010, extended time till 30.06.2010. Now a request is made on behalf of the petitioner by Sri Shaik Jeelani Basha, Learned Counsel for the petitioner, seeking further extension of time, to comply with the order of this Court, till 31.07.2010. We consider it appropriate, in such circumstances, to grant time finally to the petitioner to pay 25% of the disputed penalty on or before 31.07.2010. In default, it is open to the respondents to take such further action as they are entitled to, in accordance with law, to recover the penalty amount in its entirety. The Writ Petition stands disposed of accordingly. However, in the circumstances, without costs. B.PRAKASH RAO,J RAMESH RANGANATHAN,J Date:05.07.2010 Usd/ktl