IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 20477 of 2008 Between: M/s S S Comfort Systems (p) Ltd., 11-4-649/2/2, Srivilas Apartments, A.C.Guards, Lakadikapool, Hyderabad-500 004, Rep by Managing Director Mr S.Sunand, S/o S.S Chalapathi Rao, aged 45 years. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Joint Commissioner (CT) Legal, O/o. the Commissioenr of Commercial Taxes, 2nd Floor, commercial Taxes Complex, Opp: Gandhi Bavan, Nampally, Hyderabad. 2 The Dy. Commissioner (C.T), Abids Division, 1st Floor, Kakatiya Buildings Nampally, Hyderabad. 3 The Commercial Tax Officer, Aghapura Circle, Kakatiya Bilding, Nampally, 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 direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned order dated 26-08-2008 passed by the 1st respondent in CCT's Ref.No.LV(1)/617/2008 as illegal, arbitrary, unjust and contrary to the principles of natural justices and fair play and consequently set aside the same. Counsel for the Petitioner:SRI.T.RAMESH BABU Counsel for the Respondents.: SPECIAL STANDING COUNSEL FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 20477 of 2008 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) This writ petition is ﬁled challenging the order, dated 26.8.2008 passed by the 1st respondent in CCT’s Ref.No.LV (1)/617/2008. It is the case of the petitioner that against the order of the 2nd respondent, an appeal has been preferred before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal and the same is pending. The petitioner ﬁled a stay application before the 1st respondent. But the 1st respondent rejected the stay application vide the order impugned herein. Hence, the present writ petition has been filed. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Special Standing Counsel for Commercial Tax and perused the material available on record. It is the contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has preferred an appeal before the Tribunal and the same is pending and at this juncture, if the stay is not granted and if the disputed tax is recovered, the very purpose of filing the appeal would be defeated. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the fact that the appeal is pending before the 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. Accordingly, there shall be stay of recovery of the disputed tax for the assessment year in question, pending disposal of the appeal before the Tribunal, subject to the condition of the petitioner depositing 50% of the disputed tax, within a period of eight weeks from today. However, it is made clear that the amount paid, if any, shall be given credit to the above stipulated sum. Subject to the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ________________________ Justice T. Meena Kumari _________________________ Justice Ramesh Ranganathan Date: 19th September, 2008 Nn/gurc. THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 20477 of 2008 (Order delivered by the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) 19/09/2008