IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 4188 of 2008 Between: M/s. Srinivasa Rice Mill, Near Kotasatteemma 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 Joint Commissioner (CT) Legal, Hyderabad. .....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 or order or direction particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus granting stay of collection of the disputed tax of Rs.1,96,090/- for the tax period from May to July, 2006 and February to March, 2007 (2006-07) and Rs.18,459/- for the month of May, 2007(2007-08) arising in pursuance of the stay rejection orders of the third respondent dated 11.01.2008 passed in CCT's Ref. No.LV(2)/939/2007 and CCT's Ref.No.LV(2)/940/2007 pending disposal of the appeal before the second respondent or to pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.KRISHNA MURTHY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following : ORAL ORDER: (per THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI) Seeking a writ of mandamus declaring order dated 11.01.2008 made by the third respondent herein in CCT’s Ref. Nos. LV(2)/939/2007 and LV(2)/940/2007 pending disposal of the Appeals before the second respondent, rejecting to stay collection of disputed tax of Rs.18,459/- and Rs.1,96,090/- respectively, as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of the A.P.G.S.T. Act, 1957, the petitioner filed this writ petition. The petitioner is an assessee on the rolls of the first respondent herein. The first respondent by proceedings dated 7.8.2007 made an assessment under VAT Act for the period from May to July, 2006 and February to March, 2007 determined the tax at Rs.1,96,090/-. Similarly, by proceedings dated 7.8.2007, he determined the tax at Rs.18,459/- for the month of May, 2007. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner filed appeals before the Second Respondent and also moved stay petitions seeking stay of collection of the disputed tax, which were rejected by proceedings dated 4.10.2007 in Appeal No.ELR/40/2007- 08 and ELR/41/2007-2008. Thereupon, the petitioner filed stay petitions before the third respondent, who, by the impugned orders, rejected the stay. It is submitted that pursuant to the rejection of stay, the first respondent is contemplating to take coercive steps for recovery of the disputed tax amounts. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Special Standing Counsel for Commercial Taxes. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that the writ petition can be disposed of at the stage of admission directing the petitioner to deposit half of the disputed tax amounts within a period of six weeks from today and the respondents are directed not to take coercive step for recovery of the tax, pending finalisation of the Appeals by the Appellate Authority, which is subject matter of dispute in the Appeals before the Appellate Authority. It is made clear that the amounts paid, if any, shall be given credit to the above stipulated sums. With these directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ____________________ T.MEENA KUMARI, J. ____________ G.ROHINI, J. February 28, 2008 Copy in three days. //BO// MAS