IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWELTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 4776 of 2009 Between: M/s. Lumbini Constructions Ltd. D.No. 6-3-666/A, Lumbini Towers, Punjagutta, Hyderabad. Rep by its Managing Director P. Sukender Reddy, S/o. Sri P. Raja Reddy ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Additional Commissioner (CT) (Legal), Office of the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Nampally St.Road, Opp : Ghandhi Bhavan, Hyderabad : Andhra Pradesh 2 The Deputy Commissioner (CT) Punjagutta Division, Abids, Hyderabad. 3 The Commissioner Tax Officer, Somajiguda Circle, Abids, 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 an appropriate Writ or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of mandamus, declaring the impugned order dated 23.01.2009 passed by the 1st respondent in CCT'S REF.NO.LIII(2)794/2008 for assessment year 2002-2003 (APGST) as illegal, unjustified and contrary to the provisional of law and Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.B.SRINIVAS Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 4776 of 2009 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri. Justice T.Meena Kumari) This writ petition is filed seeking to declare the order dated 23.1.2009 passed by the 1st respondent in CCT Ref.No.L.III for the assessment year 2002-2003 as illegal. It is the case of the petitioner that aggrieved by the order passed by the 2nd respondent, an appeal has been preferred before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. At the same time, the petitioner has filed a stay petition before the 1st respondent for stay of disputed tax pending disposal of the appeal before the tribunal. But, the said stay petition was dismissed by the 1st respondent. Hence, the present writ petition has been filed. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax and perused the material available on record. It is the contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has preferred an appeal before Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal and the same is pending and that the petitioner has already paid 25% of the disputed tax and that taking advantage of the orders passed by the 1st respondent refusing to grant stay of collection of the disputed tax pending the appeal before the tribunal, coercive steps may be taken by the authorities and in these circumstances, if the stay is not granted and if the entire disputed tax is recovered, the very purpose of filing the appeal 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 balance disputed tax, pending disposal of the appeal before the tribunal, subject to the condition of the petitioner depositing 50% of the disputed tax, on or before 31st March 2009. However, it is made clear that the amount already 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 C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy Date: 12th March, 2009 Note: Operative portion of the order by wire (BO) gurc. THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 4776 of 2009 (Order of the Division Bench delivered by the Hon’ble Sri Justice T.Meena Kumari) 12/03/2009