HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No:1167 OF 2008 Dated:28.01.2008 Between: M/s. Karnataka Metals Company, 19 & 20, A1-Kareem Trade Centre, KTC, M.G. Road, Ranigunj, Secunderabad rep., by its Manager V. Prabhakar. ..Petitioner And 1. The Commercial Tax Officer, Ranigunj Circle, Hyderabad and another. ..Respondents. HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No:1167 OF 2008 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) The present writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking to declare the action of the 2nd respondent in rejecting the stay application vide order, dated 14.12.2007 as illegal and arbitrary and consequently to grant stay of collection of the disputed tax of Rs.7,62,344/- for the assessment year 2006-07 pending disposal of the appeal before the 2nd respondent. The main grievance of the petitioner is that against the assessment proceedings of the 1st respondent, an appeal has been preferred before the 2nd respondent and along with the appeal, an application seeking stay of collection of disputed tax was filed before the 2nd respondent. But the said application was rejected. Pursuant to the rejection of stay, the 1st respondent has issued notice dated 16.01.2008 directing the petitioner to pay the amount. Hence, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. Heard the learned Counsel 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 preferred an appeal before the 2nd respondent challenging the assessment proceedings and that the petitioner has already paid 12.5% of the disputed demand while filing the appeal and at this stage, if the relief as to the stay of the proceedings is not entertained and if the recovery of the disputed tax is effected during the pendency of the appeal before the 2nd respondent, the very purpose of filing the said appeal, which is a statutory remedy that is available to the aggrieved party, would be defeated. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the pendency of the appeal before the 2nd respondent, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, We feel it a fit case wherein stay can be granted, but subject to imposition of certain conditions. Accordingly, there shall be stay of recovery of disputed tax till disposal of the appeal pending before the 2nd respondent subject to the condition of the petitioner depositing 50% of the disputed tax within a period of six (6) 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 G. Rohini Date: 28th January, 2008 Nn/Gurc. HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No:1167 OF 2008 (Order delivered by the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) 28/01/2008