IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.CHANDRA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO : 9868 of 2009 Between: M/s. Nikhil Efineries Pvt. Ltd., ADB Road, Near Vakalpudi Light House, Suryaraopet Village, Kakinada, represented by its Director, Mr.Amit Kumar Agarwal S/o. Vinod Kumar Agarwal. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Commercial Tax Officer, Kakinada. 2 Joint Commissioner (CT) Legal, O/o. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. 3 Assistant Commissioner (CT) (LTU) Kakinada. .....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 a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or Order or direction in declaring the action of the 2nd Respondent in rejecting the stay petition in CCT's Ref.No.LV(3)/198/2009 dated 15.04.2009, is illegal, arbitrary and consequently grant stay of collection of disputed central sales tax of Rs.6,18,477/- pursuant to the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner (CT), Kakinada dated 19.01.2009 for the assessment year 2003-04 under the Act. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI TEJPRAKASH TOSHNIWAL Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.CHANDRA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO : 9868 of 2009 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Smt. Justice T.Meena Kumari) This writ petition is filed seeking to declare the order, dated 15.4.2009 passed by the 2nd respondent rejecting the stay petition, as illegal and arbitrary and consequently, to grant stay of collection of the disputed tax of Rs.6,18,477/- for the assessment year 2003-04. It is the case of the petitioner that against the revised assessment order passed by the Deputy Commissioner (CT), an appeal has been preferred before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal and at the same time, the petitioner has also filed a stay petition before the 2nd respondent for stay of recovery of the disputed tax pending disposal of the appeal before the Tribunal, but the 2nd respondent rejected the stay petition. Hence, the present writ petition has been filed. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax and perused the material available on record. It is the contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has preferred an appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal and the same is pending and the 2nd respondent refused to grant stay and taking advantage of the same, the authorities are trying to take coercive steps for collection of the disputed tax and in these circumstances, if the stay is not granted and if the entire disputed tax is recovered, the very purpose of filing the appeal would be defeated. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the fact that the appeal is pending before the Tribunal, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, we feel it a fit case wherein stay can be granted, but subject to certain conditions. Accordingly, there shall be stay of recovery of the disputed tax, pending disposal of the appeal before the Tribunal, subject to the condition of the petitioner depositing 50% of the disputed tax for the assessment year 2003-04, within a period of eight weeks from today. However, it is made clear that the amount already paid, if any, shall be given credit to the above-stipulated sum. Subject to the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. __________________________ Justice T.Meena Kumari __________________________ Justice B. Chandra Kumar Date: 6th May, 2009 Gurc/nn. THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. CHANDRA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO : 9868 of 2009 (Order of the Division Bench delivered by the Hon’ble Sri Justice T.Meena Kumari) 06.05.2009