IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.S.NARAYANA WRIT PETITION NO : 4627 of 2008 Between: M/s TATA Consultancy Services Limited, 1 Software Units Layout, Hyderabad - 500 081, rep. by its Sr. Manager - Finance, Mr. Ganesh T. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commercial Tax Officer, Madhapur Circle, Hyderabad. 2 The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), Hyderabad Rural Division, 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 of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction restraining the 1st respondent from taking any coercive steps for recovery of the balance disputed tax of Rs.1,72,22,260/- out of total disputed tax of Rs.3,44,44,520/- for the tax period September 2005 to March 2006 pending disposal of the appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.DWARAKANATH Counsel for the Respondents: A.V.Krishna Koundinya, Special Standing Counsel for Commercial Taxes. The Court made the following : O R D E R (Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice B.Prakash Rao): Heard Sri S.Dwarakanath, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri A.V.Krishna Koundinya, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents and at their request, the main writ petition itself is taken up for disposal at the stage of admission. The grievance of the petitioner is that the first respondent- Commercial Tax Officer is taking coercive steps for recovery of the disputed tax, pending disposal of the appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short “the Tribunal”), which was preferred by him against the order of the first appellate authority. The case of the petitioner is that during pendency of the first appeal, he approached this Court by filing W.P.No.24457 of 2007 seeking stay of recovery of the disputed tax and this Court disposed of the same by order dated 20-11-2007 granting stay, pending disposal of the first appeal, subject to the condition of his depositing 50 per cent of the disputed tax, which according to the petitioner has already been deposited and therefore, he seeks that the stay of recovery be continued till disposal of the second appeal by the Tribunal. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and also perused the material available on record. Since the main appeal itself is pending before the Tribunal, we refrain from going into the merits of the case. However, taking note of the compliance of the conditional order passed by this Court earlier in W.P.No.24457 of 2007, during pendency of the first appeal before the first appellate authority, we are of the view that the interest of justice would be met if stay of recovery is granted till disposal of the appeal by the Tribunal subject to the same condition of deposit of 50 per cent of the disputed tax on or before 31-03-2008. Accordingly, we dispose of the writ petition directing that there shall be stay of recovery of the disputed tax, till disposal of the appeal by the Tribunal, subject to the condition of the petitioner depositing 50 per cent of the disputed tax on or before 31-03-2008. It is needless to mention that the amount which has already been deposited by the petitioner towards the disputed tax, during pendency of the first appeal, be given credit to. No order as to costs. __________________ B.Prakash Rao, J Dated 4th March, 2008 __________________ P.S.Narayana,J Note: Issue C.C in one week (b/o) vrn ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 The Commercial Tax Officer, Madhapur Circle, Hyderabad. 2 The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), Hyderabad Rural Division, Hyderabad. 3 2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{MSN}