HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. PRAKASH RAO AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.9796 OF 2010 ORDER: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ramesh Ranganathan) The petitioner is a franchisee of M/s. APTECH Limited and is carrying on business of providing computer education to students as part of the overall object enunciated in the policy of the Government of Andhra Pradesh. For the assessment year 2003-04, a show cause notice was issued on 11.02.2003 by the assessing authority, calling upon the petitioner to show cause why they should not be brought to tax, under Section 5E of the A.P.General Sales Tax Act, at 8%. After the petitioner had filed their objections, the first respondent passed a final order of assessment on 27.06.2005 levying tax of Rs.16,76,624/-. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner preferred an appeal to the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), Guntur who, by his order dated 10.10.2005, remanded the matter back to the assessing authority. The third respondent, in exercise of his powers under Section 20 of the Act, proposed to revise the order of the Appellate Authority and issued a show cause notice dated 25.05.2009 calling upon the petitioner to show cause why the order should not be revised. After the petitioner had filed their objections, the revisional authority passed the revisional order dated 27.06.2005. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner preferred an appeal to the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Visakhapatnam, in TA No. 582 of 2009 and deposited Rs.4,43,776/- towards 25% of the disputed tax. The petitioner filed TMP.No. 43 of 2010 seeking stay of collection of the disputed tax. The Tribunal, by its order dated 29.03.2010, granted stay of collection of the disputed tax subject to the condition that the petitioner deposits another 25% of the total disputed tax within six weeks. Aggrieved thereby, the present writ petition is filed. While several contentions are raised by Sri G. Kalyan Chakravarthy, Learned Counsel for the petitioner, on merits we see no reason to examine them in as much as the substantive appeal is still pending before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. The interlocutory order, against which the present Writ Petition is filed, merely required the petitioner to pay another 25% i.e. 50% of the disputed tax. We do not find any illegality in the discretion exercised by the Tribunal necessitating interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Sri G. Kalyan Chakravarthy, Learned Counsel for the petitioner, seeks further six weeks time to comply with the order of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. We consider it appropriate, in such circumstances, to dispose of the Writ Petition with the following directions. Subject to the condition that the petitioner complies with the interlocutory order passed by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, which is under challenge in this Writ Petition, within six weeks from today, the respondents are directed not to take any coercive steps for recovery of the balance disputed tax, pending disposal of the appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. Subject to the above observations, the Writ Petition is dismissed. However, in the circumstances, without costs. B. PRAKASH RAO, J RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J Date 05.07.2010 Usd/ktl