IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.V.SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO : 17651 of 2008 Between: M/s.Visnhu Enterprises, 6/2,Chandramouli Nagar, Guntur-522002, Rep.by its Proprietor MR.C.Venkateswara Rao ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commercial Tax officer, Bradipet,Guntur 2 The Joint Commissioner (CT) Legal, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad .....RESPONDENTS 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 order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the 1st respondent in insisting upon the petitioner for payment of the disputes demand when pending stay application before the 2nd respondent for the assessment year 1997-98 under the CST Act as arbitrary, contrary to the provisions of the Act and also in violation of principles of natural justice and Rule of law and consequently grant stay of collection of disputed demand of Rs.72,120/- for the assessment year 1997-98 (CST) pending disposal of the appeal before the Hon`ble Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal in TA.No.205 of 2006 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.SHAIK JEELANI BASHA 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 action of the first respondent in insisting for payment of the disputed tax amount, pending stay application before the second respondent, for the assessment year 1997-98 under Central Sales Tax Act and consequently to grant stay of collection of the disputed tax of Rs.72,120/-, pending Appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal in TA No. 205 of 2006, the petitioner filed this writ petition. The petitioner is a proprietary concern engaged in the business of cotton and a registered dealer on the rolls of the first respondent both under the A.P.G.S.T. Act and C.S.T. Act. The first respondent has completed the assessment for the year 1997-98 by proceedings dated 19.3.2001 levying tax on Rs.9,01,500/- on the ground that the inter-State sale of cotton bales is not covered by C/E1 forms, against which the petitioner preferred an appeal to the second respondent, which was rejected at the admission stage, on the ground of delay. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner preferred Second Appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad, in T.A. No. 205 of 2006 and also moved stay petition, before the second respondent. It is contention of the petitioner that the authority would dismiss the application in a routine course. But since the first respondent is threatening to take coercive steps, pending stay application, for recovery of the disputed amount, the petitioner filed this writ petition. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the second respondent being Departmental Authority, before whom the stay application was argued on 29.7.2008, would reject the same in a routine course and since no stay has been ordered by the second respondent, 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 demanded tax amount, as per the impugned order, within a period of eight weeks from today and the respondents are directed not to take coercive step for recovery of the balance tax amount, pending finalisation of the appeal by 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. ____________________ Justice T.Meena Kumari ______________________ Justice P.V. Sanjay Kumar August 13, 2008 Copy in three days //BO// MAS ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{TRK}