IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF AUGUST, TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 6459 of 2009 Between: M/s. Arya Communications & Electronic Services (P) Ltd., Manorama; 1-10-98/30; Dwarakadas Colony, Mayuri Marg, Begumpet, Hyderabad-500 016, rep. by its Asst. Manager Accounts, R. Balasubrahmanyam. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Additional Commissioner (CT) Legal, 2nd Floor, Commercial Taxes complex, Opp. Gandhi Bhavan, Nampally, Hyderabad. 2 The Deputy Commissioner (CT), Panjagutta Division, 4th floor, "B" Block, Mayur Kushal Complex, Near Chermas, Abids, Hyderabad. 3 The Commercial Tax Officer, Somajiguda Circle, 8th floor, "B" Block, Mayur Kushal Complex, Near Chermas, Abids, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the mstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be ed to issue a writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ ndamus declaring the impugned order dated 17.03.2009 passed by the espondent in CCT's Ref.No.LIII(2)/102/2009 as illegal, arbitrary, unjust ontrary to the facts and law and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.R.R.VISWANATH Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN W.P.NO.6459 OF 2009 ORAL ORDER: (Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice Ramesh Ranganathan) Aggrieved by the order passed by the 1st respondent dated 17.3.2009, rejecting the petitioner’s request for grant of stay of collection of disputed tax pending the appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, the present writ petition is filed. The petitioner disputes its liability to pay the tax demanded of Rs.46,95,610/-, on the ground that “Two Way Radio Communication Equipment” known as Signaling and Strategic Electronic Equipment, are electronic goods for which they are eligible to pay a concessional rate of tax of 2%. The revisional authority, however, levied tax at 4% treating the said goods as electrical goods. In the impugned order, the 1st respondent has rejected the petitioner’s request for grant of stay pending the appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal mainly on the ground that the Two Way Radio Communication equipment would come under electrical goods and not electronic items. Sri S.R.Viswanath, learned counsel for the petitioner, would seek to rely on certain material, which form part of the material papers filed before this court, in support of his contention that Two Way Radio Communication Equipments are electronic goods and not electrical goods. Prima facie the submissions of the learned counsel cannot be said to be without merit. We do not however, propose to adjudicate on the merits of the order passed by the Revisional authority as these are all matters for examination by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal which is final fact finding authority under the Act. As this court had granted interim stay as early as on 26.3.2009, which order still continues to remain in force, it would suffice if the respondents herein are directed not to resort to any coercive steps for recovery of the disputed tax from the petitioner pending disposal of their appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. ______________________ GODA RAGHURAM,J ____________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN,J Date: 5.8.2009. Tsnr THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN W.P.NO.6459 OF 2009 ORAL ORDER: (Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice Ramesh Ranganathan) Date: 5.8.2009. gk/Tsnr