HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.V.SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.22164 of 2008 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed) This petition is ﬁled seeking a writ of mandamus declaring the action of ﬁrst respondent in rejecting the stay application vide proceedings dated 09- 09-2008 without considering the contentions of the petitioner, as arbitrary and illegal. The petitioner also seeks to grant stay of collection of disputed demand of Rs.1,50,615/- for the year 2003-04, pending disposal of the appeal by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad. 2. The details relevant for disposal of the writ petition are that the petitioner – M/s Ramana Agencies, is a dealer in soft drinks and LPG gas cylinders and that it is a registered dealer under APGST Act. By order dated 30-12-2004, the petitioner had been assessed by the Commercial Tax Oﬃcer-II, Adoni, to pay value added tax (VAT) of Rs.54,741/-. While so, the Deputy Commissioner (CT), Kurnool Division, revised the said assessment order under Section 20(2) of the said Act, on the ground that the assessing authority has not ascertained the tax levied/paid at the preceding point of sale and arrived at the VAT due and payable at Rs.1,50,615/- for the assessment year 2003-04, vide order dated 22-03-2007. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner preferred appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. 3. The main grievance of the petitioner is that the ﬁrst respondent has rejected the stay application mechanically, without considering its contentions. 4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Commercial Taxes and perused the material on record. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner mainly contended that the stay application was rejected without adverting to the contentions raised by the petitioner, that too when the appeal is pending before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader contended that the Tribunal may be directed to expedite the disposal of the appeal itself. 6. We have considered the submissions made on either side. Admittedly, the second respondent had revised the assessment order passed by the assessing authority and arrived at Rs.1,50,615/- being VAT due and payable by the petitioner and application seeking stay of payment of the revised VAT, was rejected by the ﬁrst respondent and that an appeal is pending before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. When the appellate authority is seized of the matter, we are not inclined to express any opinion on the merits of the case. 7. Having regard to the assessment of disputed amount demand for the year 2003-04 and the fact that appeal is pending, we deem it appropriate to direct the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal to dispose of the appeal expeditiously, preferably within three months from the date of receipt of this order. Pending disposal of the appeal, there shall stay of impugned demand subject to the petitioner depositing half of the demanded amount within eight weeks from today. Tax, if any, already paid by the petitioner shall be given credit. 8. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission. ___________________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J. ________________________ P.V.SANJAY KUMAR, J. 10-10-2008 bsc