IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 23144 of 2008 Between: M/s. Srinivasa Rice Mill, Near Kotasattemma Temple, Timmarajupalem, Nidadavole Mandal, West Godavari District, Rep by its Proprietrix, Smt. M. Krishna Veni ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Commercial Tax Officer, Nidadavole. 2 Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), Vijayawada. 3 Additional Commissioner (CT) (Legal), (FAC), 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 a Writ or order or direction particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus granting stay of collection of the disputed penalty of Rs. 2,48,782/- for the tax period May, 2006 to July, 2006 and February, 2007 and March, 2007, arising in pursuance of the stay rejection order of the third respondent dated 25-7-2008 passed in CCT's Ref.No. LV(2)/527/2008 pending disposal of the appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI.S.KRISHNA MURTHY Counsel for the Respondents: SPECIAL STANDING COUNSEL FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 23144 of 2008 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) This writ petition is ﬁled seeking to grant stay of collection of the disputed penalty of Rs.2,48,782/- for the tax period May 2006 to July, 2006 and February, 2007 and March, 2007, pending disposal of the appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. The main grievance of the petitioner is that against the orders passed by respondents No.1 & 2, an appeal has been preferred before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal and the same is pending and that the application ﬁled before the 3rd respondent seeking stay of collection of the disputed penalty was dismissed and now, the respondents are taking steps to collect the disputed penalty and in such course, a notice has also been issued. Hence, the present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Special Standing Counsel 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 that the stay application ﬁled before the 3rd respondent was dismissed and now, the 1 st respondent issued a notice demanding payment of the disputed penalty and in these circumstances, if the relief of stay is not granted and if the disputed penalty is recovered, the very purpose of ﬁling the appeal before Tribunal 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 penalty pending disposal of the appeal before the Tribunal subject to the condition of the petitioner depositing 25% of the disputed penalty, within a period of six weeks from today. However, it is made clear that the amount 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 Ramesh Ranganathan Date: 24th October, 2008 Nn/Gurc. THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No:23144 OF 2008 (Order delivered by the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) 24/10/2008