IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 13026 of 2008 Between: M/.s Cal-on- marketing Ltd., 16-4, Prashath Nagar, Uppal, Hyderabad. rep. by its Managing Director, Sri. A.Suresh Babu. .... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commercial Tax Officer, Tarnaka Circle, Secunderabad. 2 Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Tarnaka Circle, Secunderabad 3 Deputy Commissioner (CT), Secunderabad Division, Hyderabad. 4 Joint Commissioner (CT)(L), A.P., Hyderabad. 5 The Manager, Oriental Bank of Commerce, Habsiguda Branch, 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 tax of Rs. 2,49,500/- for the assessment year 2003-04 ( APGST) arising in pursuance of the revision order passed by the third respondent dated 17.05.2007 read with the garnishee notice dated 18.06.2008 issued by the second respondent in Form VAT 206 to the fifth respondent pending disposal of the appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal or to pass such Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.S.KRISHNA MURTHY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Division Bench of this Court made the following order : THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN *** WRIT PETITION No. 1 3 0 2 6 OF 2008. ORAL ORDER : ( Per the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari }. Seeking a writ of mandamus granting stay of collection of the disputed tax of Rs.2,49,500/- for the assessment year 2003-04 (APGST) arising out of the revision order passed by the third respondent dated 17-4-2007 read with garnishee notice dated 18- 6-2008 issued by the second respondent in Form VAT-206 to the fifth respondent pending disposal of the appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal or to pass such other suitable orders as this Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. 2. The petitioner is a partnership firm engaged in the business of Electronic Balances and is an assessee on the rolls of the first respondent. The first respondent through his proceedings dated 05-1-2005 made the final assessment for the years 2003-04 under the APGST Act on a gross and net turnover of Rs.1,16,38,522/- and Rs.45,33,599/- respectively and subjected the net turnover to tax @ 4%, amounting to Rs1,81,344/-. The petitioner had paid tax amounting to Rs.2,44,796/- of the assessment year 2003-04 (APGST). The third respondent by his proceedings dated 25-5-2007 revised the rate of tax on the entire net turn over of Rs.45,32,599/- from 4% to 8% and also brought to tax under Section 5-A a turn over of Rs.69,23,579/- and levied tax @ 1% on the said turn over. Against the said revision order passed by the revisional authority, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal and stay petition before the fourth respondent seeking stay of collection of the balance disputed tax of Rs.1,86,048/-. The same was heard on 21-8-2007 and till date no orders were received. In the meanwhile, the second respondent issued the garnishee notice dated 18-6-2008 in Form VAT-206 to the bankers of the petitioner company, the fifth respondent herein. Against the said non-passing of stay the present writ petition is filed. 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that though several contentions were raised before the respondent, the respondent has refused to grant stay vide the order impugned herein. It is submitted that pursuant to the rejection of stay by the first respondent, the second respondent is contemplating to take coercive steps for recovery of the disputed tax. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Special Standing Counsel for Commercial Taxes. 5. 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 due tax amount, as per the impugned order, within a period of eight weeks from today and the respondents are directed not to take coercive step for recovery of the tax, pending finalisation of the appeal by the Appellate Authority. It is made clear that the amount paid, if any, shall be given credit to the above stipulated sum. With these directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ____________________ T. MEENA KUMARI, J. _________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J 23-6-2008. I s L ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies