IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 11492 of 2008 Between: M/s. Vijaya Cotton Ginning Mill, Thimmapuram, Guntur District, rep. by its Managing Partner, Mr. P. Ravindra Babu ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commercial Tax Officer, Chilakaluripet. 2 The Joint Commissioner (CT) Legal, A.P., 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 appropriate writ, order or direction declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in rejecting the stay application by proceedings, dated 26.03.2008 in CCT's Ref.No.LV/34/2008 as arbitrary, contrary to law and in violation of principles of natural justice and consequently grant stay of collection of disputed demand of Rs.1,43,404/- for the assessment year 1998-99 pending disposal of the appeal before the Hon'ble Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Additional Bench at Visakhapatnam. Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr.M.V.PAVAN KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following : Order : (per Hon’ble Sri Justice L.Narasimha Reddy) The petitioner is a partnership concern and an assessee under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957. The Deputy Commissioner has rejected the appeal of the petitioner on 03-12- 2004. Aggrieved thereby the petitioner filed an appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. Inasmuch as the Tribunal is not vested with the power to grant stay he had approached the 2nd respondent with necessary application. Through his order, dated 26- 03-2008, the 2nd respondent rejected the application for grant of stay. Hence the Writ Petition. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Special Government Pleader for Commercial Taxes. The Deputy Commissioner (C.T.) Guntur rejected the appeal filed by the petitioner against the assessment order of the 1st respondent. Thereafter, the petitioner availed the remedy of appeal and on account of the fact that the appellate Tribunal is not vested with the power to grant stay he had approached the 2nd respondent. If the amount involved is recovered from the petitioner even while the appeal is pending, virtually nothing remains to be decided, and we are of the view that ends of justice would be met if further proceedings are stayed on condition that the petitioner pays half of the amount involved. Hence the Writ Petition is disposed of directing that the further proceedings in pursuance of the order, dated 22-03-2002, shall remain stayed, pending disposal of the appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, on condition that the petitioner deposits half of the amount involved within a period of six weeks from today. The amount, if any, already paid by the petitioner towards the said liability shall also be taken into account. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dt:28.05.2008 _________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN,J Usd/tsy To 1 The Commercial Tax Officer, Chilakaluripet. 2 The Joint Commissioner (CT) Legal, A.P., Hyderabad. 3 2CCs to the Special GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX 4 2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{MSN}