THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION Nos. 23414 and 23415 of 2009 Dated: 30-10-2009 Between: M/s L.G.Polymers (India) Pvt. Ltd. Rep. By its Vice-President SriB.Sudhakar. …Petitioner and The Assistant Commissioner (CT) LTU, O/o Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Visakhapatnam and another …Respondents. W.P.No. 23415 of 2009 Between: M/s L.G.Polymers (India) Pvt. Ltd. Rep. By its Vice-President SriB.Sudhakar. …Petitioner and The Assistant Commissioner (CT) LTU, O/o Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Visakhapatnam and another …Respondents. Common order:( Per RR, J) Since the questions involved in both the writ petitions are similar, both the writ petitions were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. For the purpose of disposal of both the writ petitions, it would suffice if the facts in W.P.No. 23414 of 2009 are noted: The petitioner was granted a Sales Tax Holiday for the period 10-10-1998 to 9-10-2005 on its expanded capacity over and above the base production of Rs.221.67 Crores. The petitioner claims to have availed tax holiday in respect of the turnover over and above the base production considering the period of availment as commencing from 10th October till 9th October of the succeeding year. While so, the 1st respondent passed an order of assessment dated 22-3-2004 for the assessment year 2000-01 both under APGST and CST Acts disallowing the benefit of Tax Holiday on the ground that the availment of benefit of Tax Holiday by the petitioner for a duration of one year commencing from the date of availment of incentive, i.e., 10th October of the relevant year, was impermissible. The Assessing Authority was of the view that the financial year should be the unit of assessment for the purpose of availing tax holiday. Similar orders were passed on 22- 3-2004 for the assessment years 2001-02, 2002-03 and 2003-04. Against the said order dated 22-3-2004 the petitioner preferred appeals to the Appellate Deputy Commissioner. During the pendency of the Appeals, the Government of Andhra Pradesh, by its Memo dated 15-7-2004, advised the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes to issue clarification under Section 42-A of the APGST Act advising adoption of unit duration from October 10th till October 9th of the subsequent year for the purposes of computation of base turnover and availment of tax holiday on the turnover exceeding the base turnover. As a result, the Appellate Deputy Commissioner allowed the appeals. The Assessing Authority passed consequential order dated 15-2-2008 for the assessment year 2000-01 (CST) allowing tax holiday in respect of production over and above the base production duly taking the unit of availment as 10th October of the year and ending with 9th October of the succeeding year. In so far as the assessment years 2001-02, 2002-03 and 2003-04 are concerned, the Assessing Authority passed final order of assessment on 21-3-2005, 28-3-2006 and 28-3-2007 respectively in conformity with the orders passed by the Appellate Deputy Commissioner dated 4-2-2005, While so, the Joint Commissioner issued notices dated 6-1-2009 proposing to initiate revisional proceedings under Section 20 of the Act on the purported ground that the Appellate Deputy Commissioner, instead of allowing the appeal, should have remanded the matter to the assessing authority for verifying whether the petitioner had collected tax on the turnover beyond the base production also. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner preferred an appeal to the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Visakhapatnam vide T.A.No. 190 of 2009 to 197 of 2009. The petitioner also filed stay applications in TMP Nos. 294 of 2009 to 301 of 2009 seeking stay of operation of the order of the Joint Commissioner dated 31-1-2009 pending disposal of the appeals. It is the specific case of the petitioner that the Appellate Tribunal heard the stay petitions on 8-10-2009 and adjourned the same to 9-10- 2009 and, thereafter, the matters stood adjourned to 12-10-2009 directing both sides to file their written arguments. According to the petitioner, on 12-10-2009, both the parties complied with the said directions and filed their written arguments. Thereafter, no orders could be passed by the Tribunal, as its Chairman demitted office on his elevation. In the absence of the Chairman, the Tribunal is said to be adjourning the matters periodically and that the matters were now adjourned to 3-11-2009. While so, the Assessing Authority issued notices dated 12- 10-2009 and 22-10-2009 giving seven days time to comply with the orders of the Joint Commissioner. The petitioner’s grievance is that, since no interim orders were passed, the Assessing Authority is duty bound to pass orders afresh which would result in the appeals preferred by the petitioner being rendered infructuous. Since the stay applications are still pending before the Tribunal, and no orders have been passed on account of circumstances beyond the petitioner’s control, we deem it appropriate to direct stay of all further proceedings till the stay applications filedby the petitioner, which are still pending before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Visakhapatnam, are disposed of. The writ petitions are allowed after hearing Sri S.R. Ashok, learned Senior Counsel and Sri P. Balaji Varma, learned Special Standing Counsel for Commercial Taxes. No costs. ______________________________ GODA RAGHURAM, J _______________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J 30th October, 2009 GRR