IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 20708 of 2008 Between: M/s.P.Venkatrami Reddy Workers Contractor Nandyal, Presented by Sri P.Venkatrami Reddy S/o Chinna Malla Reddy Kurnool District ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes(legal) Office of Commissioner of Commercial Taxes M.J Road Nampally, yderabad 2 The Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes Kurnool Division, Kurnool District 3 The Commercial Tax Officer NO.II Circle Nandyal,Kurnool District 4 The Bank Manager Andhra Bank, Nandyal,Kurnool District 5 The Bank Manager Rayalaseema Grammena Bank(Andhra Pragati Bank) Extension Counter Nandyal,Kurnool District 6 The Assistant Pay & Accounts Officer S.R.B.C Scheme, Nandyal .....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, order or direction in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in issuing form 206 to the 4th and 5th & 6th respondent for payment of the taxes as illegal, arbitrary improper and unjust and to consider the case of the petitioner and also the circumstances which were out of control of the petitioner in not complying the direction of this Hon'ble Court passed in W.P No.5537/2008 by its order Dt 14.03.2008 to condone the delay in view of payment of the balance of 50% of the disputed tax by way of Challan on 10-09-2008 and direct the 3rd respondent not to insist the petitioner for the payment of the balance of the disputed tax and consequently set aside the From 206 demand for the payment of the outstanding tax issued to the 4th to 6th respondent by the 3rd respondent dt 23- 08-2008 and grant such other relief or reliefs Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.M.V.J.K.KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents : SPECIAL STANDING COUNSEL FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 20708 of 2008 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) This writ petition is ﬁled seeking to declare the action of the 3rd respondent in issuing Form 206 to respondents 4, 5 & 6 for payment of taxes, as illegal and arbitrary, and to consider the case of the petitioner in not complying with the direction of this Court passed in W.P No.5537/2008 by its order dated 14.03.2008, within the stipulated time and to condone the delay in view of payment of the balance of 50% of the disputed tax by way of Challan on 10-09- 2008, and direct the 3rd respondent not to insist for the payment of the balance of the disputed tax and consequently, to set aside the Form 206 demand dated 23.08.2008. It is the case of the writ petitioner that he ﬁled a writ petition viz., WP No.5537 of 2008, challenging the rejection of stay application during the pendency of the appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. On 4.3.2008, this Court disposed of the writ petition granting stay of collection of the disputed tax pending the appeal before the Tribunal, subject to the condition of the petitioner paying half of the disputed tax liability, within a period of eight weeks from the date of the order. But the petitioner could not pay half of the disputed tax within the stipulated period, since he was bedridden for four and half months. He complied with the above condition on 10.9.2008. Meanwhile, the 3rd respondent issued the impugned notice to respondents 4 to 6. Hence, the present writ petition has been ﬁled to condone the delay in complying with the condition stipulated in the above writ petition and consequently, to set aside the impugned notice. It is the contention of the petitioner that the delay in depositing the amount as directed by this Court in WPNo.5537 of 2008 has occurred due to illness of the petitioner and therefore, it is neither willful nor wanton, so that the same may be condoned by setting aside the consequent notice. On the other hand, the learned Standing Counsel contended that since the amount as directed in W.P.NO.5537 of 2008 has been paid, the delay can be condoned. Heard both the Counsel and perused the material available on record. The reasons assigned by the petitioner for the delay in complying with the order in WP No.5537 of 2008 are convincing and cogent. In this view of the matter and in view of the compliance of the order passed in W.P.No:5537 of 2008 by paying half of the disputed tax subsequently, We feel that it is a ﬁt case wherein the delay can be condoned and the operation of the notice impugned can be suspended. Accordingly, the delay is condoned and consequently, the notice impugned is suspended. Subject to the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. ______________________ Justice T. Meena Kumari __________________________ Justice Ramesh Ranganathan dated: 23.9.2008 Note: Issue CC in two days (BO) Nn/gurc. THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 20708 of 2008 (Judgment delivered by the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) 23.9.2008