IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 4220 of 2008 Between: M/s.N.R.Constructions, 222/B,MIGH, Balkampet, Hyderabad. Rep.by its Partner, Sri A.Krishnam Raju ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Commercial Tax Officer, Punjagutta Circle, Hyderabad. 2 Appellate Deputy Commissioner(CT), Punjagutta Division, Hyderabad. 3 Additional Commissioner (CT)(Legal), 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 issue a Writ or order or direction particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus granting stay of collection of the disputed tax of Rs.87,81,271/- for the tax period from April, 2005 to March,2007, arising in pursuance of the assessment order dated 20.12.2007 in Form 305 passed by the first respondent read with the notice dated 20.02.2008 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 : ORAL ORDER: (per THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI) Seeking a writ of mandamus declaring assessment order dated 20.12.2007 read with notice dated 20.2.2008, issued by the first respondent herein pending disposal of the Appeal before the second respondent, rejecting to stay collection of disputed tax of Rs.87,81,271/-, as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of the A.P.G.S.T. Act, 1957, the petitioner filed this writ petition. The petitioner is a partnership firm engaged in the execution of works contracts and is an assessee on the rolls of the first respondent herein. The first respondent by proceedings dated 20.12.2007 made a block assessment for the period from 1.4.2005 to 31.3.2007 instead of considering the turnover for the period from 29.8.2005 to 31.3.2007 and called upon the petitioner to further pay tax of Rs.87,81,271/-. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner filed Appeal before the Second Respondent along with stay petition seeking stay of collection of the disputed tax, which was rejected by proceedings dated 11.2.2008 in Appeal No. PV/92/2007-2008. Thereupon, the petitioner filed a revision petition before the third respondent, which is pending. While so, the first respondent issued notice dated 20.2.2008 calling upon the petitioner to pay the balance tax of Rs.76,83,612/- within seven days. It is submitted that pursuant to the rejection of stay and pursuant to the notice dated 20.2.2008, the first respondent is contemplating to take coercive steps for recovery of the disputed tax amount. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Special Standing Counsel for Commercial Taxes. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that the writ petition can be disposed of at the stage of admission directing the petitioner to deposit half of the disputed tax amount within a period of six weeks from today and the respondents are directed not to take coercive step for recovery of the tax, pending finalisation of the Appeal by the Appellate Authority, which is subject matter of dispute in the Appeal before the Appellate Authority. It is made clear that the amount paid, if any, shall be given credit to the above stipulated sum. With these directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ____________________ T.MEENA KUMARI, J. ____________ G.ROHINI, J. February 28, 2008 Copy in three days. //BO// MAS