IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.Y.SOMAYAJULU WRIT PETITION NOS.6821, 6823 AND 6875 OF 2008 WRIT PETITION NO : 6821 of 2008 Between: M/s. Krishna Instutte of Medical Sciences, #1-8-31/1, Minister Road, Secunderabad, rep. by its Chief Executive Officer, Dr. B. Bhasker Rao. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Commercial Tax Officer, M.G. Road Circle, Secunderabad. 2 Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT) Punjagutta Division, Hyderabad. 3 Additional Commissioner (CT) Legal, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. (Respondents 2 and 3 are not necessary parties) .....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 to issue a writ or order or directilon particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus granting stay of collectilon of the disputed Luxury tax of Rs.24,78,488/- for the assessment year 2004-05 (APLT) arising in pursuance of the stay rejection order of the stay rejection order of the second respondent dated 31.01.2008 passed in Appeal No.B/146/2007-08 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 WRIT PETITION NO : 6823 of 2008 Between: M/s Krishna Institute of Medical Sciences, #1-8-31/1,Minister Road,Secunderabad, Rep by its Chief Executive Officer, DR.B.Bhaskar Rao. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Commercial Tax Officer, M.G.Road Circle, Secunderabad. 2 Appllate Deputy Commissioner(CT), Punjagutta Division,Hyderabad. 3 Additional Commissioner(CT) Legal, Andhra Pradesh,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 to issue a writ or order or direction particularly one in thenature of Writ of Mandamus granting stay of collection of the disuted luxury tax of Rs.81,12,579/- for theassessment year 2006-07 (APLT) arising in pursuance of thestay rejection order of the second respodent dated 31.01.2008 jpassed in Appeal No.B/148/2007-08 pending disposal of the appeal before the second respondent or to pass such furhter or Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.KRISHNA MURTHY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX WRIT PETITION NO : 6875 of 2008 Between: M/s. Krishna Institute of Medical Sciences, #1-8-31/1, Minister Road, Secunderabad, Rep by its Chief Executive Officer, Dr. B. Bhaskar Rao ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Commercial Tax Officer, MG Road, Circle, Secunderabad. 2 Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), Punjagutta Division, Hyderabad 3 Addtional Commissioner (CT) Legal, Andhra Pradesh, 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 to issue a writ or order or direction particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus granting stay of collection of the disputed Luxury tax of Rs. 57,02,912/- for the assessment year 2005-2006 (APLT) arising in pursuance of the stay rejection order of the second respondent dated 31-1-2008 passed in Appeal No. B/147/2008 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 : COMMON ORDER: (Per The Hon’ble Sri Justice B.Prakash Rao) Heard Sri S.Krishna Murthy, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, and Sri A.V.Krishna Koundinya, learned Special Government Pleader for Commercial Taxes, who takes notice on behalf of the respondents, and at their request, the main Writ Petitions are taken up together for disposal. In all these Writ Petitions, the petitioner, who is a medical institute, seeks to assail the orders refusing to grant stay pending substantive appeals before the second respondent herein as against the assessment orders passed for various assessment years whereby the first respondent subjected certain charges levied by the petitioner to Luxury Tax. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that having regard to the nature of the medical services rendered by the petitioner and the charges collected in respect thereof, there cannot be any levy of luxury tax in respect of the other medical services, which have been appended to the petitioner-Institute. The learned Counsel further submits that the second respondent ought to have granted stay pending appeals, as the matters involve substantial questions. The learned Counsel placed reliance on Section 2(g)(g) of the Andhra Pradesh Tax on Luxuries Act, 1987 (for short ‘the Act’) vis-à-vis Section 5(2) of the Andhra Pradesh Luxuries Tax Act, 1997, and contended that since the very provision indicates that the charges for the medical services rendered in connection with the treatment or any amount charged for conducting any medical test or any medicines used by the hospital either for check up or treatment cannot be subjected to Luxury tax, the impugned orders are unsustainable. Having heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Special Government Pleader for Commercial Taxes at length, though we find substantial point urged on behalf of the petitioner, since substantive appeals are pending involving several substantial questions, we refrain from expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, but it is suffice, in the interest of justice, to grant stay pending disposal of the appeals subject to certain conditions. The Writ Petitions are disposed of granting stay pending disposal of the appeals on condition of the petitioner depositing half of the disputed tax in each of the matters within a period of eight weeks from today by giving credit to the amount, if any, already deposited. For eight weeks, there shall be unconditional stay and stay shall continue till disposal of the appeals provided the amount is deposited within the stipulated time. Further, the appellate authority shall consider and dispose of the appeals on merits and in accordance with law after giving notice and opportunity to the parties concerned. It is needless to mention that the garnishee notices, if any, issued by the respondents- authorities shall remain suspended till disposal of the appeals by the appellate authority. There shall be no order as to costs. -------------------------- (B.Prakash Rao, J) 31st March, 2008 -------------------------- (C.Y.Somayajulu, J) LUR ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 Commercial Tax Officer, M.G. Road Circle, Secunderabad. 2 Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT) Punjagutta Division, Hyderabad. 3 Additional Commissioner (CT) Legal, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. 4 2CCs to 5 2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{RLD}