THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.260 of 2011 July 25, 2011 Between: M/s.Sri Nagendra Company, Lalapet, Guntur Represented by its Proprietor, Sri S.N.Anjaneyulu ... Petitioner And Commercial Tax Officer, Lalapet Circle, Guntur And others …Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.260 of 2011 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ramesh Ranganathan) The relief sought for in this writ petition is to grant stay of collection of the disputed tax of Rs.26,44,027/-, for the assessment year 2007-08, arising pursuant to the proceedings of the second respondent dated 20.10.2008. The petitioner, a dealer in chillies, is an assessee under the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2005. For the tax period 2007- 08, the petitioner was assessed to tax by order of the second respondent dated 20.10.2008. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner carried the matter in appeal before the third respondent on 22.6.2009. Along with the appeal, the petitioner filed an application seeking stay of collection of the disputed tax pending disposal of the appeal. While matters stood thus, the fourth respondent issued a notice of attachment in Form-5 dated 20.12.2010, which was served on the petitioner on 29.12.2010, attaching the properties under Section 27 of the Revenue Recovery Act, 1890 for recovery of the disputed tax. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court. This Court, by order dated 12.1.2011, suspended the operation of notice of attachment on condition that the petitioner deposited half of the disputed tax within a period of six weeks. Sri S.Suri Babu, learned Counsel for the petitioner, would submit that the interim order of this Court has since been complied with. While several contentions are raised, in challenge to the impugned order, we consider it wholly inappropriate to examine the said contentions in as much as a substantive appeal is pending adjudication before the third respondent. Since the petitioner has already deposited half the disputed tax, and as the appeal is still pending before the third respondent, we consider it appropriate to direct the third respondent to dispose of the appeal at the earliest, in any event not later than three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. No costs. ________________ (V.V.S. RAO, J) ______________________________ (RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J) July 25, 2011 YS