IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 17205 of 2008 Between: Suryalakshmi Cotton Mills Ltd., Surya Towers, 105, S.P. Road, Secunderabad - 500 003, rep. by its Managing Director, Mr.Paritosh Agarwal. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Assistant Commissioner (CT) LTU, Begumpet, Hyderabad. 2 Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT) Punjagutta Division, Hyderabad. 3 Additional Commissioner (CT) (Legal), O/o the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Opp: Gandhi Bhavan, 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 writ, order or direction, more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the order of the Additional Commissioner (CT) (Legal), Hyderabad, 3rd respondent herein in CCT's Ref.No.L.III(2)483/2008, dated 10.7.2008, as illegal, void, inoperative and set aside the same; and (ii) interdict the respondents from recovering disputed tax of Rs.58,74,266/- till disposal of the appeal by the Appellate Deputy Commissioner, 2nd respondent herein and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.S.CHAKRAPANI Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE T. MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN W.P.NO. 17205 OF 2008 ORDER: (Per Smt. T. Meena Kumari, J) The present writ petition is ﬁled challenging the order dated 10.7.2008 passed by the 3rd respondent rejecting to grant stay of recovery of disputed tax from the petitioner. The petitioner was an assessee on the rolls of the 1st respondent and the assessment under VAT Act for the year 2007-08 upto October, 2007 was ﬁnalized by the assessing authority on 15.4.2008. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the petitioner ﬁled an appeal. Along with the appeal, he also ﬁled an application seeking stay of recovery of disputed tax, which was rejected by the impugned order. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that ends of justice would have been met if stay was granted pending disposal of the appeal. Accordingly we stay the collection of disputed tax subject to deposit of half of the disputed tax amount by the petitioner within a period of eight weeks from today and the respondents are directed not to take coercive steps for recovery of the disputed tax, pending appeal before the appellate authority. If any amount paid earlier shall be given credit to. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs. ___________________ T. MEENA KUMARI, J _________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J Dt.7.8.2008 NB: CC of order be furnished in one week. /BO/ KR ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 Assistant Commissioner (CT) LTU, Begumpet, Hyderabad. 2 Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT) Punjagutta Division, Hyderabad. 3 Additional Commissioner (CT) (Legal), O/o the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Opp: Gandhi Bhavan, Hyderabad. 4.2 CCs to GP for Commercial Tax 5. 2 CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{KURR}