HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No:2204 OF 2008 Dated:7.2.2008 Between: M/s Sri Haranath Engineering Co., Rep., by its Proprietor P. Janardhana ..Petitioner And 1. The Commercial Tax Officer-I, Kurnool, and others. ..Respondents. HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No:2204 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 third respondent in rejecting the stay petition vide order dated 08.01.2008 as illegal and arbitrary and consequently, to grant stay of collection of the disputed tax and interest thereon for the period from 13.9.2005 to 31.3.2007 pending disposal of the appeal before the 2nd respondent. The main grievance of the petitioner is that aggrieved by the assessment order of the 1st respondent, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the 2nd respondent. Along with the appeal, the petitioner also filed an application seeking stay of collection of the disputed tax pending disposal of the appeal. But, the 2nd respondent rejected the stay petition. Having aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred revision before the 3rd respondent. But the 3rd respondent also rejected the stay. Hence, the present writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner. 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 against the assessment order of the 1st respondent, an appeal is pending before the 2nd respondent and that the petitioner has already paid 12.5% of the disputed tax while filing the appeal and at this stage, respondents 2 and 3 are not justified in rejecting the stay application. It is further contended that taking advantage of the rejection of stay, the authorities are insisting for payment of the disputed tax and at this juncture, if the relief of stay is not entertained and if the recovery of disputed tax is effected, the very purpose of filing the appeal before 2nd respondent would be defeated. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the fact that the appeal is pending 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 certain conditions. Accordingly, there shall be stay of recovery of the disputed tax pending disposal of the appeal before the 2nd respondent subject to the condition of the petitioner depositing 50% of the disputed tax, within a period of six 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: 7th February, 2008 Note: Communicate by wire at party’s costs (BO) Nn/Gurc. HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No:2204 OF 2008 (Order delivered by the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) 07/02/2008