IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION Nos. 23452 and 23462 of 2008 W.P. No. 23452 of 2008 Between: 1 The Asst. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes-LTU Abids Division, Hyderabad. 2 The Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, (Legal) O/o. The Commissioner (CT) Commercial Taxes Complex, Station Road, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONERS AND M/s. Larsen & Toubro Limited, S.10-173, F.M. Road, Hyderabad, Rep. by its Asst. Manager-Indirect Taxes & Authorised Signatory Mr. K. Udaya Bhaskar. .....RESPONDENT 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 to issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction declaring the order passed by the Hon'ble Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal in TMP No. 334 of 2008 in TA No. 289 of 2008 dt. 25-9-2008 in granting absolute stay of collection of tax without considering teh contentions raised by the petitioners as illegal, arbitrary, unjustified and unreasonable and against all the cannos of fiscal statutes and also the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Dunlop India case pass such other order or orders Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.K.RAJI REDDY(SPL.SC FOR CT) Counsel for the Respondent No.: . WRIT PETITION NO : 23462 of 2008 Between: 1 The Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes-LTU, Abids Division, Hyderabad. 2 The Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Legal), O/o. The Commissioner (CT), Commercial Taxes Complex, Station Road, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONERS AND M/s. Larsen & Tourbo Limited S.10-173, F.M. Road, Hyderabad- 500004, rep. by its Asst. Manager - Indirect Taxes & Authorised Signatory Mr. K. Udaya Bhaskar. .....RESPONDENT 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 to issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction declaring the order passed by the Hon'ble Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal in TMP.No.333 of 2008 in T.A.No.258 of 2008, dt. 25.09.2008 in granting absolute sty of collection of tax without considering the contentions raised bythe petitioners as illegal, arbitrary, unjustified and unreasonable and against all the canons of fiscal statues and also the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Dunlop India case pass such other order or orders Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.K.RAJI REDDY(SPL.SC FOR CT) Counsel for the Respondent No.: . The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.V. SANJAY KUMAR Writ Petition Nos. 23452 and 23462 of 2008 Common Order: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Goda Raghuram) These writ petitions are by the revenue assailing two orders of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad, both dated 25.09.2008 in TMP Nos.334 and 333 of 2008 in TA Nos.289 and 258 of 2008 respectively. The respondent in these writ petitions filed the appeals before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad, against the revisional orders passed by the Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes-the second writ petitioner herein, for the assessment years 2001-02 and 2002-03 respectively under the provisions of the APGST Act, 1957. In the miscellaneous petitions in the appeals the respondent sought interim stay of collection of the disputed tax. By a laconic order, bereft of any reasons, the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal granted stay of the entire amount of disputed tax. The only contribution of the learned Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal is in para 5 of the order, which reads: “After hearing both sides and having gone through the documents placed before us, we are of the opinion that interests of justice will be met if collection of disputed tax of Rs.9,59,97,259/- for the assessment year 2001-02 (APGST) and Rs.4,32,12,290/- for the assessment year 2002-03 (APGST) is stayed pending disposal of the main appeals.” Paras 1 to 4 of the order set out the statement of circumstances in which the applications are filed or are narrative in nature. Consideration of an application for interlocutory relief is also a judicial function and the Tribunal performs a judicial function both at the hearing of an appeal and an application for interim relief. It is an established principle that while the power to grant stay is discretionary, it is not the discretion of the Judge but the discretion of the law, and the only way an order reflecting the exercise of discretion can be validly passed is by recording reasons for the decision. An unreasoned judicial order is a contradiction in terms. The two orders of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad, both dated 25.09.2008, in TMP Nos.334 and 333 of 2008 in TA Nos.289 and 258 of 2008, respectively are vitiated for the failure to record prima facie reasons in support of the conclusion recorded. It is, accordingly, set aside. The Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad, will now consider TMP Nos.333 and 334 of 2008 in the respective appeals afresh and shall record brief reasons for the exercise of discretion (on the respondent’s applications for interim relief), expeditiously, in any event within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petitions are, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ GODA RAGHURAM, J. ______________________ P.V. SANJAY KUMAR, J. Date: 11.12.2008 Nsr