IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 13495 of 2008 Between: M/s. Ion Exchange Speciality Chemicals Limited, Flat No. 134, Ravira Apartments, 6-3-347/9, Punjagutta, Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh. Rep. by N. Krishna Prasad, S/o. N. Madhava Rao, Aged about 37 Years, Occ: Finance Manager, Ion Exchange (India) Limited, R/o. BHEL, MIG -949, Nallagandla, Hyderabad ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The State of Andrha Pradesh, Rep. by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh. 2 Additional Commissioner (CT) Legal, Office of the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh. 3 Deputy Commissioner (CT) Legal, Punjagutta Division, Hyderabad. 4 Commercial Tax Officer, Khairatabad Circle, 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 an order, direction or writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th respondent in threatening coercive action consequent on the order of dismissal of the stay petition by the 2nd respondent bearing No. CCT's Ref.No. LIII (2)/322 dated 29-04-2008 pending adjudication of the appeal on the file of the Hon'ble Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust and improper. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.A.SRINATH Counsel for the Respondents : SPECIAL STANDING COUNSEL FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 13495 of 2008 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) The present writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking to declare the action of the 4th respondent in threatening to take coercive steps consequent on the dismissal of the stay petition by the 2nd respondent vide order No:CCT Ref.No:LIII (2)/322, dated 29.4.2008 during the pendency of the appeal before the tribunal as illegal and arbitrary. The main grievance of the petitioner is that aggrieved by the assessment order passed by the 4th respondent, an appeal has been preferred before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes and the same was disposed of exparte. Consequently, an appeal has been preferred before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal and a stay petition was filed before the 2nd respondent, but the said stay application was rejected. Now, the 4th respondent is resorting to invoke the provisions of the Revenue Recovery Act. Having aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for Commercial Tax and perused the material available on record. The learned Counsel for the petitioner contended that against the assessment order passed by the 4th respondent as well as the Appellate Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, an appeal has been preferred before the tribunal and the same is pending and at this juncture, if the relief as to the stay of the collection of the disputed tax is not entertained and if the recovery of the disputed tax in question is effected during the pendency of the appeal before the tribunal, the very purpose of filing the said appeal, which is a statutory remedy that is available to the aggrieved party, would be defeated. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the pendency of the appeal 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 imposition of certain conditions. Accordingly, there shall be stay of recovery of the disputed tax for the assessment year in question, till disposal of the appeal pending before the tribunal, subject to the condition of the petitioner depositing 50% of the disputed tax within a period of six (6) weeks from today. However, it is made clear that the amount, if any already paid, 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 Ramesh Ranganathan Date: 27th June, 2008 Nn/gurc. THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No:13495 OF 2008 (Order delivered by the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) 27/06/2008