IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 10732 of 2009 Between: M/s.Baljaj Auto Finance Ltd Regd. Office: S.D. Road, Secunderabad, Rep. by its Executive (Legal), Mr. Mohammad Shakeel Ahmad Ansari. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commercial Tax Officer Tirupathi II Circle Tirupathi 2 The Appellate Deputy Commissioner, Kurnool Division, Kurnool. 3 The Additional Commissioner (CT) Legal, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 an appropriate Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in dismissing the revision petition filed by the petitioner through the impugned orders in CCT's Ref.No. LIII(3)/209/2009 dated 12-05-2009 as illegal, arbitrary, high handed and set aside the same and restrain the 1st respondent from taking any coercive steps for recovery of the balance disputed tax of Rs. 1,54,84,767/- from out of the total disputed tax of Rs. 2,62,05,15/- for the tax period 2005-2006 and 2006-2007 under the APVAT Act, 2005 Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.BHASKAR REDDY VEMIREDDY Counsel for the Respondents: Sri K. Raji Reddy, Special Standing Counsel for Commercial Tax The Court made the following : ORAL ORDER: (Per Sri Anil R. Dave, CJ) Rule. Service of rule is waived by Sri K. Raji Reddy, learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents. The petitioner has been aggrieved by an order dated 12-05-2009 passed by respondent No.3, whereby the revision petition filed it has been rejected. The said revision petition had been filed during the pendency of an appeal which has been admitted by the Appellate Deputy Commissioner. As the stay application filed by the petitioner before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner had been rejected, against the order of rejection, the aforestated revision petition had been filed. The learned advocates have submitted that in matters involving similar facts and legal issues, this Court has protected the petitioners – assessees by passing an order to the effect that 50% of the amount of tax be paid during the pendency of the appeals before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner. In view of the aforestated admitted fact, it is directed that the petitioner shall pay 50% of the amount of tax disputed in the appeal within four weeks from today and upon payment of the said amount, no coercive recovery shall be affected for the balance amount of tax. The amount of tax paid so far shall be given credit to while calculating 50% of the amount payable by the petitioner. The petition stands disposed of as above with no order as to costs. ANIL R. DAVE, CJ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J 2nd June, 2009. ks Note: Operative portion by wire at party’s costs. B/O ks