IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 10724 of 2008 Between: M/s. Reckitt Benckiser (India) Limited, Old Bowenpally, Secunderabad A Company Incorportated Under the Campanies Act 1956, having its registered office at 227, Okhla Industrial Estate, Phase-III, Okhla, New Delhi- 110020 and its regional Office at Mahalakshmi Chambers, 29 MG. Road, Bangalore- 560 001 Repby Mr. Ramasubramanian, ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Joint Commissioner (CT) Legal, O/o the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad. 2 The Commercial Tax Officer, Bowenpally, Begumpet Division, Ameerpet, 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, order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of mandamus declaring the order dated 19-03-2008 passed by Respondent No.2 directing the petitioner to pay an amount of Rs. 1, 39,96, 178/- failing which recovery proceedings will natural justice under Justice and violative of Fundamental Rights under Article 14, 19 (10(g) of Constitution of India and consequently to stay the operation ofthe said order dated 30-04-2008 and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr. M.S. Ramachandra Rao for MS.Shireen Sethna Baria Counsel for the Respondents: GP for Commercial Tax The Court at the stage of admission made the following : ORDER: (per Sri C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy, J) This writ petition is filed questioning the action of the respondents in seeking to enforce the demand towards disputed tax under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax, 2005. Heard Sri M.S. Ramachandra Rao, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Commercial Taxes. The petitioner suffered an advance ruling on 18-03-2006 and questioning the same, he filed a tax revision case in this Court, which is admitted on 14-06-2007 and pending. In the meantime, on 19-03-2008 respondent No.2 passed order in Form No.305 directing the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.1,13,16,799/- towards tax allegedly due from April, 2007 to January 2008. Questioning the said order, the petitioner filed appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal by paying Rs.14,14,000/- as precondition for maintaining the appeal. The stay application filed by the petitioner was dismissed by the Appellate Deputy Commissioner by his order dated 23-04-2008. Immediately, the petitioner claimed to have filed a revision before respondent No.1. The grievance of the petitioner is that while his stay application filed along with the revision is pending before respondent No.1, respondent No.2 is seeking to enforce the disputed demand by issuing notice dated 30-04-2008. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Commercial Taxes, we are of the view that the interests of the petitioner deserve to be protected till such time its revision petition filed before respondent No.1 is disposed of. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents not to enforce the disputed demand towards value added tax pending disposal of revision petition before respondent No.1. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, WPMP No. 14009 of 2008 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. G.CHANDRAIAH, J C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Dated: 14-05-2008 ks ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 Joint Commissioner (CT) Legal, O/o the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad. 2 The Commercial Tax Officer, Bowenpally, Begumpet Division, Ameerpet, Hyderabad. 3 2CCs to the Government Pleader for Commercial Taxes, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad (OUT). 4 2CD copies