IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO And THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.Y.SOMAYAJULU WRIT PETITION NO.8743 of 2008 Between: M/s. JCB India Ltd., 604/2, 6th Floor, Block-I, White House, 6-3- 1192/1/1, Kundanbagh, Hyd. - 500 016, rep. by its Regional Manager, Mr. S.Sridhar. ...PETITIONER AND 1 The Commercial Tax Officer, Saroornagar Circle, Hyderabad. 2 The Appellate Deputy Commissioner ( CT ) Hyderabad Rural Division, Hyderabad. 3 The Additional Commissioner ( CT ), Legal, A.P., Nampally, Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction setting aside the notice of the 1st Respondent dated 18.4.2008 seeking payment of the balance disputed tax of Rs.2,50,14,422/- pending disposal of the appeal before the 2nd respondent as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to law consequently restrain the 1st respondent from taking any coercive steps for recovery of the balance disputed tax of Rs.2,50,16,222/- out of total disputed tax of Rs.2,85,89,968/- for the year 2004-05 ( APGST ) pending disposal of the appeal before the 2nd respondent. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.S.DWARAKANATH Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO And THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.Y.SOMAYAJULU WRIT PETITION NO.8743 of 2008 ORDER: (Per the Hon’ble Mr Justice B.Prakash Rao) Heard Sri S.Dwarakanath, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri A.V.Krishna Koundinya, learned Special Government Pleader for Commercial Tax. At their request, the Writ Petition itself is taken up for disposal at the admission stage. The petitioner herein seeks to assail the notice of the first respondent dated 18.04.2008 seeking him to pay the balance disputed tax of Rs.2,50,14,422/- (Rupees two crore fifty lakh fourteen thousand four hundred and twenty two only) as illegal and arbitrary and a consequential direction to restrain the first respondent from taking any coercive steps for recovery of the said amount. The case of the petitioner is that in respect of the similar question, on 03.09.2004, the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal granted an unconditional stay on collection of disputed tax until the disposal of the appeal. Even though he sought stay on the very same ground, the said application was rejected. Hence, the Writ Petition. Having heard the counsel on either side and on perusal of the material available on record, we are of the view that having regard to the fact that in respect of the very same question for an earlier assessment year, the Tribunal has granted stay subject to the condition of the petitioner depositing 25% of the disputed tax and the same has been followed up in the subsequent year. Since the appeal involves the same question and instead of the earlier order, the Tribunal has rejected the same without giving any reasons, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing to grant stay subject to the petitioner depositing 25% of the disputed tax within a period of four {4} weeks from today pending disposal of the appeal. The appeal shall be disposed of on merits in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible. The amounts, if any, paid already shall be given credit to. No costs. _________________ (B.PRAKASH RAO, J) __________________ (C.Y.SOMAYAJULU, J) 21st April 2008 Note: Wire at party’s cost B/O RRB