IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDMESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION No.5390 of 2010 Between: M/s. Maheswari Brothers, Maheswari House, Vizianagaram, rep.by its Manager and Authorized Signatory, Mr. S. Krishna ..... Petitioner AND The Joint Commissioner (CT) (Legal), Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad and another .....Respondents THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION No.5390 of 2010 ORAL ORDER: (per THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI) This writ petition is filed challenging the order dated 23-02-2010 passed by respondent No.1 in CCT’s Ref.No.LV(3)/26/2010, and seeking a direction to restrain respondent No.2 from taking any coercive steps for collection of the disputed tax for the assessment year 2004-05, pending disposal of the appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. 2. The case of the petitioner is that questioning the proceedings of Deputy Commissioner (CT), it had preferred an appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal and the same is pending and it had also filed an application before respondent No.1 seeking stay of collection of the disputed tax pending adjudication of the appeal but respondent No.1 rejected the said application vide the order impugned herein. Now, respondent No.2 is threatening to take coercive steps for recovery of the disputed tax. 3. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax and perused the material available on record. 4. It is the contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the appeal preferred by the petitioner is pending before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal and that the petitioner had already paid 25% of the disputed tax but consequent to the order impugned herein, the authorities are insisting for payment of the balance disputed tax and in these circumstances, if the stay is not granted and if the entire disputed tax is recovered, the very purpose of filing the appeal would be defeated. 5. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the fact that the appeal is pending before the Sales Tax Appellate 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. 6. Accordingly, there shall be stay of recovery of the balance disputed tax, pending disposal of the appeal before the Tribunal subject to the condition of the petitioner depositing 50% of the disputed tax, on or before 31st March, 2010. However, it is made clear that the amount paid if any, shall be given credit to the above stipulated sum. 7. Subject to the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. __________________ T.MEENA KUMARI, J ___________________________ NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO, J March 10, 2010 KTL